


$B 24b 154 


᾿ 1 Ἶ ΓΤ (ὦ 
t ΤᾺ ἊΝ 
: 3% 















᾿. Ἴ 
GIFT OF 


JANE K.SATHER © 













































































CAMBRIDGE GREEK TESTAMENT FOR 
SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES 
Genera Epiror: R. ST JOHN PARRY, D.D., 


FELLOW OF TRINITY COLLEGE 


THE FIRST EPISTLE GENERAL OF 


PETER 


CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS 
C. F. CLAY, MANAGER 
Hondon: FETTER LANE, E.C. 
Lvinburgh: 100, PRINCES STREET 








Berlin: A. ASHER AND CO. 
Leipsig: F. A. BROCKHAUS 
few Bork: G. P. PUTNAM’S SONS 
Bombay and Calcutta: MACMILLAN AND CO., Lrp. 
Toronto: J. M. DENT AND SONS, Lrp. 
Tokys: THE MARUZEN-KABUSHIKI-KAISHA 


All rights reserved 


μὰ Aale : ΥΝ, τ ἔ 
THE FIRST EPISTLE GENERAL OF 


PETER 


Edited by 


THE REV. G. W. BLENKIN, M.A. 


Vicar of Hitchin, and Prebendary of Lincoln Cathedral Church, 
late Fellow of Trinity College 


WITH NOTES AND INTRODUCTION 


Cambridge : 
at the University Press 


1914 


Cambridge : 
PRINTED BY JOHN CLAY, M.A. 


eg¢e - € ce : ce e 
‘ic ¢ AT, THE; UNIVERSITY PRESS 


- ὡ 


PREFACE 
BY THE GENERAL EDITOR 


HE General Editor does not hold himself respon- 
sible, except in the most general sense, for the 
statements, opinions, and interpretations contained in 
the several volumes of this Series. He believes that 
the value of the Introduction and the Commentary 
in each case is largely dependent on the Editor being 
free as to his treatment of the questions which arise, 
provided that that treatment is in harmony with the 
character and scope of the Series. He has therefore 
contented himself with offering criticisms, urging the 
consideration of alternative interpretations, and the 
like; and as a rule he has left the adoption of these 
suggestions to the discretion of the Editor. 

The Greek Text adopted in this Series is that of 
Dr Westcott and Dr Hort with the omission of the 
marginal readings. For permission to use this Text 
the thanks of the Syndics of the Cambridge University 
Press and of the General Editor are due to Messrs 
Macmillan & Co. 


TRINITY COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE. 
July 1914. 


M179238 


Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2007 with funding from 
Microsoft Corporation 


https ‘/larchive.org/details/firstepistlegene0Oblenrich 


ed 


PREFACE 


HE completion of this commentary has been un- 
avoidably delayed by the thronging duties of 
parochial work since my departure from Cambridge. 
In the Notes and Introduction I have relied chiefly 
upon the study of other New Testament Books and of 
the Septuagint with which the Epistle is saturated. 
The opinions adopted are in many cases based upon 
the views of other commentators too numerous to 
mention. I must, however, express my indebtedness to 
the commentary of Dr Hort upon the earlier portion 
of the Epistle, and to that of Dr Bigg upon the whole 
book, even where 1 fail to concur with his views. For 
the problems of date and authorship I have derived 
most help from the exhaustive articles of Dr Chase on 
S. Peter and 1 Peter in Hastings’ Dictionary of the 
Bible, and not without full consideration have I ven- 
tured to differ from some of the conclusions of Professor 
Ramsay in The Church in the Roman Empire. 


My thanks are due to the Syndics of the University 
Press for their patient forbearance and to the General 
Editor for his great kindness in reading the proofs and 
for much valuable criticism. 


Ge We Β 
July 1914. 


I. INTRODUCTION 


Chapter I. 

5 II. 

EES 

Ἢ τῳ δ 

” N. 

Ἢ VI. 

peer if! | 

» VIII. 

ἘΦ ΔΗ͂Σ: 

SE Yo Ma 

.: ΧΙ. 
Ii, ΤΈΧΤ 
III. ΝΟΤΕῈΒ 


IV. INDEXES... 


CONTENTS 


The Life and Character of St Peter 
The Authorship of the Epistle ... 
The Canonicity of the Epistle ... 
The Place of Writing 

The Date of the Epistle ... 


Relations between 1 Peter and 
other N.T. Books 


The Readers 


The Occasion and Purpose of the 
Epistle ... 


Doctrine in 1 Peter 


. The Greek Text and Versions ... 


PAGE 
ix—Ixxxvili 
ix—xix 
XX—XXVii 
XXVli—-xxix 
Xxix—xxxiii 


xxxili—liii 


liii—lxix 


lxix—Ixxv 


lxxv—Ilxxxi 


Ixxxi—lxxxvi 


lxxxvi—Ixxxvii 


Literature ... iit aN ... Lxxxvii—Ixxxviii 


eee eee eee 


1—8 


9—128 


129—132 


INTRODUCTION 


1. Tue Lire AND CHARACTER OF St PETER 


Simon (or Symeon Acts xv. 14; 2 Pet. i. 1) was son of Jonas 
(Mt. xvi. 17) or John (Jni, 42, xxi. 15—17) and brother of Andrew. 
His home was at Capernaum but he may have originally come 
from Bethsaida (Jn i. 44). He was married at the time of his call 
(Mk i. 30) and in later years his wife accompanied him on his 
missionary travels (1 Cor. ix.5). He and his brother were partners 
with James and John as fishermen. 

His calls. (a) To personal friendship with Jesus (Jn i. 41—42). 
Probably both he and Andrew had been disciples of the Baptist. 
Andrew having found the Messiah brings Simon to our Lord who 
at once recognizes in him latent possibilities which will develope 
into Rock-like strength of character. 

(6) His call to discipleship (Mt. iv. 18—19; Mk i. 16—18) 
took place while he was fishing. He and Andrew are summoned 
to follow Jesus with a promise that they shall be “fishers of men.” 
St Luke (v. 1—11), either following a different tradition or more 
probably describing a later repetition of the call to discipleship, 
records it after the healing of Simon’s wife’s mother and other 
miracles in Capernaum. Our Lord borrows Simon’s boat from 
which to preach. An extraordinary draught of fishes convinces 
Simon that Jesus must possess more than human powers. He 
exclaims “Depart from me for I am a sinful man, O Lord,” but 
_§ assured “From henceforth thou shalt catch men.” 


(c) The call to Apostleship was perhaps some six months later, 
when our Lord selected twelve to be His special companions to 


I PETER b 


x INTRODUCTION 


be trained as Messengers (Mk iii. 14). On their first Mission 
they were sent “two and two,” and it is a plausible conjecture 
that St Peter’s companion was St John. They had previously 
been partners, and together with Andrew, they formed the inner- 
most circle of the Twelve at the raising of Jairus’ daughter 
(Mk v. 37), at the Transfiguration (Mk ix. 2), in Gethsemane 
(Mk xiv. 33). Peter and John “made ready the Passover” 
(Lk. xxii. 8). At the Last Supper Peter made signs to John 
(Jn xiii. 24). They alone entered the High Priest’s palace at 
the Trial (Jn xviii. 15), They alone visited the Sepulchre on 
hearing of the empty tomb (Jn xx. 2—10). It was of St John’s 
future that St Peter asked the Risen Lord (Jn xxi. 20). 

Peter and John together healed the cripple (Acts iii. 1—10), 
together they were arrested by the Sanhedrin (111. 11), together 
they visited Samaria (viii. 14). They with James the Lord’s 
brother were regarded as “pillars” of the Church and supported 
St Paul’s work among the Gentiles (Gal. ii, 9). 


Sit Peter's Character as pourtrayed in the Gospels is that of a 
warm-hearted, impulsive man ready to dare all and doubt nothing, 
but, until he had been “sifted as wheat,” his confidence was 
partly self-confidence which failed in the hour of trial; his im- 
pulsiveness led him at times to act and speak hastily. 


His impulsiveness in action may be seen in 


(a) his request to walk on the water (Mt. xiv. 28 ff.), 

(6) his proposal to make three tabernacles at the Trans- 
figuration (Mk ix. 5—6), 

(6) his conduct about the tribute money (Mt. xvii. 24 ff.), 

(α) drawing his sword to smite the High Priest’s Servant 
(Jn xvili. 10), 

(e) entering the Palace at the Trial and then denying his 
Master (Mt. xxvi. 69 ff, etc.), 

(f) entering the sepulchre (Jn xx. 6), 

(9) jumping into the water to hasten to the Risen Lord 
(Jn xxi. 7 ff.). 
His impulsiveness of speech led him at times to criticize or 
contradict his Master. - 

“All men seek for Thee” (Mk i. 37). ‘This shall never be 

unto Thee” (Mt. xvi. 22). “Thou shalt never wash my feet” ; 


LIFE AND CHARACTER OF ST PETER xi 


“Not my feet only, but also my hands and my head” (Jn xiii. 
8 ff.). “Yet will I not deny Phee” (Mt. xxvi. 35, ete). “Why 
cannot I follow Thee even now?” (Jn xiii. 37). 

The same impulsiveness led him to ask constant questions. 
“Why say the Scribes that Elias must first come?” (Mt. xvii. 10). 
“Speakest Thou this parable unto us or even unto all?” (Lk. xii. 
41). “How oft shall my brother sin against me and 1 forgive 
him?” (Mt. xviii. 21). “We have left all...what then shall we 
have?” (Mt. xix. 27). “What shall be the sign of Thy Coming?” 
(Mt. xxiv. 3; Mk xiii. 3). Who is to be the traitor? (Jn. xiii. 24). 
“Lord, whither goest Thou?” (Jn xiii. 36). ‘Lord, and what shall 
this man do?” (Jn xxi. 21). 

But that same impulsiveness made St Peter the spokesman οὗ 
the rest in confessing Christ. “Of a truth Thou art the Son 
of God” (Mt. xiv. 33). ‘Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast 
the words of eternal life. And we believe and are sure that Thou 
art the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Jn vi. 68—69). That 
confession may have been based upon impulse rather than settled 
- conviction, and so was received without comment by our Lord— 
but when (Mt. xvi. 16) St Peter made the same confession in 
answer to a definite test of their faith our Lord bestowed a special 
blessing upon him. “Thou art Peter and upon this rock I will 
build my church.” The “rock” has been variously explained to 
mean (a) the truth just asserted by St Peter, (ὁ) St Peter’s faith, 
(6) St Peter’s character as typical of the other Apostles, who with 
the prophets are described as the foundations upon which the 
Church is built (Eph. ii. 20; cf. Rev. xxi. 14). But if the words 
are understood in a more personal sense they may mean that 
St Peter is to support the first stones of the “ecclesia,” the new 
Israel of God, as we find that he did in the earlier chapters of 
Acts. A Rabbinic legend, commenting on Numbers xxiii. 9 with 
Isaiah li, 1—2, uses similar language of Abraham: “As soon as 
God perceived that there would arise an Abraham He said 
‘Behold I have found the “petra” upon which to build and lay 
foundations’” (see Chase, Hastings’ D. of B., iii. 795). 

St Peter is also made a “steward” of the kingdom to whom 
the keys are entrusted (cf. Isaiah xxii. 22) and the “scribe” who 
has authority to “bind or loose,” declaring what God has pro- 
nounced to be obligatory or otherwise. But in Mt. xviii. 18 the 

b2 


᾿ xii INTRODUCTION 


same power of “binding” or “loosing” is conferred upon all the 
Apostles. 

But with all his faults St Peter was specially dear to his 
Master, as may be seen from the prayer that his faith might not 
fail and the charge to strengthen his brethren (Lk. xxii. 32), the 
pitying glance in the hour of his shame (Lk. xxii. 61), the special 
message about the Resurrection (Mk xvi. 7). He was the first 
of the Twelve to see the Risen Lord (Lk. xxiv. 34; 1 Cor. xv. 5), 
and finally on the lake side St Peter greatly forgiven proved how 
greatly he loved, and was entrusted with a share in the Good 
Shepherd’s own work and learned that he should glorify God by 
sharing his Master’s fate in death (Jn xxi. 15 ff). 

In the Acts of the Apostles St Peter seems at once to take the 
lead among his brethren. He proposes the election of a new 
Apostle (i. 15 ff.) and was the spokesman on the Day of Pentecost. 
In the successive stages of the development of the Church traced 
by St Luke, (a) Jerusalem, (Ὁ) Judaea, (c) Samaria, (d) “unto the 
uttermost part of the earth” (i. 8), St Peter takes the initiative. 
He, with St John, performs the first miracle. (iii. 1—8) and acts 
as spokesman when they are tried by the Sanhedrin (iii. 11 ff.). 
He asserts his primacy in the first visitation of judgment 
(v. 1—11). Although all the Apostles are described as working 
“sions and wonders,” St Peter’s personality seems to have 
created the greatest impression, so that his very shadow was 
thought to bring healing (v. 15). When the Apostles were 
imprisoned and miraculously released St Peter again acted as 
spokesman before the Sanhedrin (vy. 29 ff.). 

The persecution which followed St Stephen’s martyrdom 
scattered the Christians but thereby extended the Gospel to 
Samaria, and in that stage again St Peter with St John is 
sent by the Apostles to superintend this new development and 
set his seal upon the work begun by Philip (viii. 14 ff.). 

Again in the period of rest which followed St Paul’s conversion 
St Peter undertakes a missionary tour “throughout all quarters” 
(ix. 32) and healed Aeneas at Lydda and Tabitha at Joppa 
(ix. 33—48). 

But the greatest conquest of all still awaited him. It was by 
his mouth that “God made choice among them that the Gentiles 
should hear the word of the Gospel and believe” (Acts x., xv. 7). 


LIFE AND CHARACTER OF ST PETER xiii 


For that venture of faith, even in spite of his Master’s world- 
wide commission, St Peter’s impulsiveness was barely prepared. 
His old habit of contradiction is seen in his protest against 
“anything common or unclean” (x. 14). But no sooner did he 
learn that God was “no respecter of persons” than he boldly 
vindicated his action in baptizing Cornelius and his companions 
at Caesarea. The door was thus opened to the Gentiles and the 
final stage of world-wide development had begun. Here St Peter’s 
primacy as a pioneer seems to have been completed. His courage 
and steadfastness had given solid support for laying the founda- 
tions of the Church, and from that time the work passed chiefly 
into other hands. 

These events probably took place very soon after St Paul’s 
conversion (c. 34 or 35 A.D.), and apparently Jerusalem was for 
some years longer St Peter’s headquarters. He was the only 
Apostle present, except James the Lord’s brother, when St Paul 
visited Jerusalem three years after his conversion (Gal. 1. 18). 
On that occasion the Christians were at first afraid to receive 
St Paul until Barnabas brought him to the Apostles and told 
the story of his conversion and subsequent work in Damascus 
(Acts ix. 26). 

Shortly before the death of Herod Agrippa in 44 4.p. St James 
was martyred and St’ Peter imprisoned. Being released by an 
angel he left Jerusalem and ‘departed to another place” (xii. 17). 
The tradition that he then went to Rome seems certainly in- 
consistent with the evidence of St Paul’s Epistles. 

A very wide-spread tradition represents St Peter as the founder 
and organizer of the Church in Antioch, and he may probably 
have made Antioch a centre for mission work among the Syrian 
Jews as an “Apostle of the Circumcision” (Gal. ii. 7). 

We next hear of him at the Apostolic Conference at Jerusalem 
in A.D. 49 (or 751). On that occasion St Paul had a private 
conference with St Peter, St John and James the Lord’s Brother 
as the reputed “pillars” of the Church. It is possible that they 
may have suggested some compromise, such as the circumcision 
of Titus (Gal. 11. 3), as a concession to Jewish prejudices. But 
to this St Paul would not agree, regarding it as a breach of 
_ principle to circumcise a Gentile like Titus, despite his prominent 
position. Ultimately the three leaders fully accepted St Paul’s 


xiv INTRODUCTION 


position, and at the public conference (Acts xv. 7—11) St Peter 
acted as spokesman. He reminded the Assembly that he himself 
had been selected to admit the first Gentile converts. By bestow- 
ing the gift of the Holy Spirit upon Cornelius and his companions 
God had confirmed that new departure, and had placed Jews 
and Gentiles on the same level, purifying their hearts by the gift 
of faith instead of demanding the bodily purification of circum- 
cision. It would therefore be tempting God to impose upon 
Gentiles the yoke of the Law, which the Jews themselves had 
found insupportable. In fact the Jewish disciples themselves 
had learned to depend for salvation not upon the Law but upon 
faith in the free grace of the Lord Jesus. As a result of this 
speech St James, the Lord’s brother, who presided at the Con- 
ference as the resident head of the Church in Jerusalem, proposed 
that Gentiles should not be required to adopt circumcision or 
observe the whole Law. It was however thought wise to impose 
certain restrictions upon them, by demanding that they should 
abstain from meats offered in sacrifice to idols, from fornication, 
and from blood or meat containing blood. (On the meaning of 
these regulations, see Hort, Judaistie Christianity, pp. 71 f., 
Lake, Earlier Epp. of St Paul, pp. 48 ff.). 

It was probably soon after this Conference that St Peter 
himself came down to Antioch (Gal. ii. 11). Remembering 
perhaps the vision which had bidden him to “call no man 
common or unclean” and anxious to “give the right hand of 
fellowship” to St Paul’s work, St Peter at first mixed freely 
with the Gentile Christians and shared their meals. Such a 
‘step was, not unnaturally perhaps, regarded with some appre- 
hension by the stricter Jewish Christians at Jerusalem. They 
had no doubt regarded it as an extremely liberal concession to 
exempt Gentiles from observing Jewish customs. But, if leading 
Jewish Christians, like St Peter, were now proposing to abandon 
their own customs and adopt those of Gentiles, they felt that 
unnecessary liberality was being shewn, which would inevitably 
distress or even alienate the Jewish majority in the Church, 
without conferring any real benefit upon the Gentile minority. 
James, the Lord’s brother, would naturally be appealed to by 
his flock. On a previous occasion some of them had unwarrant- 
ably claimed his authority in endeavouring to impose the Law 


LIFE AND CHARACTER OF ST PETER xv 


upon Gentile Christians at Antioch and he had been obliged to 
repudiate their action (Acts xy. 24). But now he may have 
thought it wise to send a cautious warning to the more im- 
pulsive St Peter that his liberal policy was causing great 
offence to Jewish Christians. Thereupon St Peter and the 
other Jews, even including Barnabas, withdrew from eating 
with the Gentiles. Such vacillation seemed to St Paul to be a 
real breach of principle. He realized that Gentile Christians 
would inevitably feel that they were regarded as inferiors so long 
as they were uncircumcised, and would either become a separate 
Church or feel bound to observe the Law as necessary in order to 
obtain full recognition in the Church, even though it might not 
be essential for salvation. Thus St Peter’s action was virtually 
reimposing the Law, and implied that those who had deliberately 
abandoned it were committing a transgression. Yet it was to 
seek justification in Christ that they had done so, and thus Christ 
would be the cause of their sin, which is impossible. There is no 
evidence to shew how St Peter received this protest. Probably 
he accepted the principle laid down by St Paul, but as his own 
mission was specially to ‘those of the circumcision” he would 
seldom have any cause to act upon it. Thus the Judaizing 
opponents of St Paul, exaggerating St Peter’s position, set up a 
rival party at Corinth who claimed to be followers of Cephas. 
Silas at any rate, though himself one of the delegates from the 
Church at Jerusalem, must have cordially supported St Paul, 
otherwise he would not have been selected as the companion of 
his second Missionary journey. Barnabas must also have speedily 
repented of his temporary vacillation, as St Paul originally invited 
him to accompany him. But if, as is not improbable, St Mark 
was among the Jews who “withdrew” at Antioch, this may have 
confirmed an impression, produced by his previous withdrawal 
from the first Missionary journey, that St Mark was not yet in 
full sympathy with St Paul’s attitude towards Gentiles. 

After this incident we have no knowledge of St Peter’s move- 
ments for several years, except an incidental notice (1 Cor. ix. 5) 
that his wife accompanied him on his mission work. 

The existence of a Cephas party at Corinth affords no sufficient 

grounds for supposing that St Peter himself visited Corinth, 
though it may have given rise to the tradition mentioned by 


xvi INTRODUCTION 


Dionysius Bp of Corinth (c. 170 a.p.) that St Peter and St Paul 
both worked in Corinth (Eus. H. £. ii. 25). 

The tradition that St Peter visited Pontus and other provinces 
of Asia Minor, mentioned by Origen (Eus. H. £. iii. 1), Epiphanius 
(Haer. xxvii. 6), the Syriac Doctrine of the Apostles and the Acts 
of Andrew, is probably only based upon the opening salutation in 
1 Pet. and is not supported by other references in the Epistle to 
the evangelization of those districts. 

Antioch in Syria is described as a special centre of St Peter’s 
work. Thus Origen (in Luc. Hom. vi.), possibly borrowing from 
a second century list of Antiochene Bishops, describes Ignatius 
as “the second Bishop of Antioch after the blessed Peter” (cf. 
Eus. H. £. iii. 36). Chrysostom and Theodoret also connect 
St Peter with Antioch, and later tradition describes him as 
having been Bishop of Antioch for seven years. The Clementine 
Romance, despite its Ebionite inventions about the supposed 
hostility of St Peter towards Pauline teaching, seems itself to 
have originated in Syria, and is probably correct in making that 
district one of the chief centres of St Peter’s activity. 

Rome. St Peter’s work and martyrdom in Rome are attested 
by evidence so early, so wide-spread and so unanimous that even 
the most determined opponent of Papal claims could not dispute 
it with any success. 

For a full discussion of the evidence Dr Chase’s Article in 
Hastings’ Dictionary of the Bible, and Lightfoot, Clement of Rome, 
ii. pp. 481 ff. should be consulted. 

Clement of Rome (chapter 5) (c. 95 A.D.) seems to select the 
martyrdoms of SS. Peter and Paul because they took place in 
Rome.. 

Ignatius of Antioch (c. 115 a.p.) (ad Rom. c. iv.) says “I do not 
command you as Peter and Paul”—again probably selecting the 
two Apostles who had worked in Rome. 

Papias of Hierapolis (c. 130 Α.}.) (Eus., H. £. iii. 39, ef. ii. 15) 
probably described 1 Pet. as written from Rome (see p. xxviii). 

Dionysius of Corinth (c. 170 A.D.) (Eus. H. #. ii, 25) describes 
St Peter and St Paul as visiting Italy and suffering martyrdom. 

Irenaeus of Lyons (c. 190 a.v.) (Haer, iii. 1) says “Matthew 
published a Gospel...while Peter and Paul were preaching and 
founding the Church in Rome.” (Haer. iii. 3) “The Churches of 


LIFE AND CHARACTER OF ST PETER xvii 


Rome founded by the two most glorious Apostles Peter and 
Paul.... They entrusted the ministration of the bishop to Linus... 
after Linus Anencletus, after Anencletus in the ¢hzrd place from 
the Apostles Clement is elected bishop.” 

Clement of Alexandria (ὁ. “200 A.D.) (Eus. A. 8. vi. 14) says 
“When Peter had preached the word publicly in Rome the 
bystanders...exhorted Mark to write out his statements.” 

Tertullian of Carthage (c. 200 A.D.) is the earliest writer who 
describes the mode of St Peter’s death and places it in the reign 
of Nero at Rome. He also (de Baptismo 4) speaks of those whom 
Peter baptized in the Tiber and (de Praescriptione 32) says that 
Clement was ordained by Peter. 

Gaius the Roman presbyter (c. 200—220 A.D.) speaks of the 
tombs of St Peter and St Paul as still existing at the Vatican 
and the Ostian Way (Eus. H. Z. ii. 25). 

Origen of Alexandria (c. 250 4.D.) (Eus. H. Δ΄. iii. 1) says that 
St Peter was crucified head downwards at Rome. This last detail 
is also found in the Gnostic Acts of Peter, which possibly originated 
in Asia Minor in the second century and contain also the “ Domine 
quo vadis?” legend and the story of St Peter’s conflict with Simon 
Magus in Rome. The Catholic Acts of Peter, which contain 
similar details, cannot in their extant form be earlier than the 
fifth century. 


The date and duration of St Peters visit to Rome. 


Eusebius (H. E. ii. 14) describes St Peter as coming to Rome 

in the reign of Claudius and there contending with Simon Magus, 
“the author of all heresy,” and (ii. 17) he mentions a report that 
Philo in the reign of Claudius became acquainted at Rome with 
Peter who was preaching there. 
_ The Chronicon of Eusebius (?based upon Julian Africanus, 
c. 221 A.D.) in the Armenian version assigns St Peter’s visit to 
Rome to the third year of Caius 39—40 a.p. and adds that he 
remained there as “antistes” of the Church twenty years, but in 
a later passage the martyrdom of Peter and Paul at Rome is 
placed in the 13th year of Nero, 1.6. 67—68 a.p. 

Jerome places St Peter’s arrival in the second year of Claudius 
- 43—43 a.p. and says that he held the bishopric 25 years, placing 
the martyrdom of Peter and Paul in 68 a.p. 


Xviil INTRODUCTION 


The Liberian Catalogue of Roman Bishops (354 a.v.) describes 
St Peter as Bishop of Rome for 25 years but dates it 80-- ὅδ a.p., 
apparently assuming that he was made a Bishop by our Lord and 
that his see must have been Rome. 

The Liber Pontificalis has several contradictory notices : 


(a) that St Peter held the Bishopric of Antioch for 7 years, 


(6) that he entered Rome in the reign of Nero and held the 
Bishopric of Rome for 25 years, 


(c) that he was in the reigns of Tiberius, Caius, Claudius 
and Nero, 


(α) that he suffered martyrdom together with St Paul in 
the 38th year after the Crucifixion, i.e. 67 A.D. 


It would seem therefore that there is no mention of St Peter 
as Bishop of Rome until the fourth century, and the earlier lists 
of Bishops all reckon Linus as the first bishop. The 25 years’ 
episcopate may perhaps have been based upon a legend that our 
Lord ordered the Apostles to wait 12 years before going out into 
the world. This story was contained in the Preaching of Peter, 
probably an early second century book, quoted by Clement. of 
Alexandria (Strom. vi. 5), and also in the Gnostic Acts of Peter, 
which represented St Peter as coming to Rome when the 12 years 
had expired and there contending with Simon Magus. But the 
story is placed after St Paul’s departure to Spain, which would 
imply a much later date. If however the Crucifixion is dated 

.80 A.D. 12 years would bring us to 42 A.D. and this would leave 
25 years before the traditional date of St Peter’s death. 

The evidence of the first three centuries suggests a compara- 
tively late date for St Peter’s work in Rome, placing it after 
previous work in Antioch, Corinth or Asia Minor, coupling it 
with St Paul’s work in Rome which certainly did not begin until 
about 59 a.D., and connecting it with the issue of Gospels by 
St Matthew and St Mark or with the Neronian persecution. 

This later date is far more consistent with the language of 
St Paul’s Epistles. The Epistle to the Romans alike by its 
statements and its silence makes it incredible that St Peter was 
then in Rome or had previously worked there. The ignorance 
of Christianity professed by the Jews in Rome on St Paul’s 
arrival (Acts xxviii. 22), even if it was wilfully exaggerated, is 


LIFE AND CHARACTER OF ST PETER xix 


hardly consistent with the view that St Peter had been working 
in Rome. or 

In the Epistles of his first Roman Captivity St Paul mentions 
numerous fellow-workers, including St Mark and others ‘‘of the 
circumcision,” but is absolutely silent about St Peter. 

Therefore it is most difficult to believe that St Peter worked in 
Rome earlier than 61 A.D. 

On the other hand there is considerable evidence that St Peter 
did work in Rome for a considerable time, and a fair amount of 
early evidence that St Peter and St Paul worked together in Rome. 
It is therefore a very plausible conjecture of Dr Chase (Hastings’ 
D. of B., iii. 778) that St Peter may have come to Rome on 
St Paul’s invitation about the time of St Paul’s release, and that 
they worked there together for a time before St Paul started on 
the Missionary work implied in the Pastoral Epistles, and that 
St Peter remained in Rome with St Mark, until he was summoned 
to Jerusalem in 63 or early in 64 to take part in the election of 
Symeon Bp of Jerusalem. Dr Chase suggests that St Peter re- 
turned to Rome and was one of the earliest victims of the Nero- 
nian persecution in 644.D. This would tally with his burial place 
being in the Vatican near the hideous scenes of Nero’s gardens. 

If however the traditional date 67 or 68 A.D. is accepted for 
St Peter’s martyrdom, we must assume that he was absent 
from Rome during the first fury of the persecution and returned 
or was brought to Rome only to be martyred at the end of Nero’s 
reign, possibly after St Paul’s death. 

The “first trial” and protracted remand of St Paul, referred to 
in 2 Tim., and the invitation to Timothy to join him before winter 
and bring Mark with him seem hardly consistent with the view 
that the first fury of the Neronian persecution was then raging. 

The Mission work implied in the Pastoral Epistles also demands 
a longer period of liberty than would be the case if St Paul was 
executed in 64 a.D. It is therefore easier to date St Paul’s 
martyrdom about 67 A.D., and if St Peter had already suffered 
we should have expected St Paul to refer to his death. 

For an account of the various apocryphal writings ascribed to 
St Peter and a discussion of the legends about his conflict with 
Simon Magus the Article “Simon Peter” in Hastings’ D. of B. 
' should be consulted. 


xx INTRODUCTION 


2. AUTHORSHIP. 


The chief arguments in favour of the Petrine authorship are: 


A. External. 

The Epistle is quoted as the work of St Peter by Irenaeus, 
Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian and other early writers 
(possibly including Papias), while the Second Epistle of St Peter, 
which is certainly very early even if not genuine, refers to a 
previous epistle bearing the name of St Peter which most 
probably means our Epistle. 

The attestation of the Epistle by so many witnesses widely 
separated in place and circumstances shews that it had a cir- 
culation and authority in the early Church such as it could 
hardly have acquired unless it was regarded as the work of some 
leading Apostle. 


B. Internal. 

(1) The Epistle itself claims to be written by Peter an 
Apostle of Jesus Christ, and the opening salutation can only 
be rejected on one of two theories: 


(a) that it is an interpolation added in the second century 
to a document which was previously circulated anonymously. 
This view has been suggested by Harnack but it is most 
improbable. A treatise such as “Hebrews” or a homily such 
as 2 Clement might have been circulated anonymously, but 
1 Peter reads distinctly like a letter, and as such must surely 
have had some writer’s name attached to it from the first. 
Moreover if this letter was originally anonymous, it is difficult 
to account for its subsequent ascription to St Peter rather than 
to St Paul to whose writings it has a decided resemblance. 


(b) that the Epistle is a forgery. For this no adequate 
reason can be assigned, unless we are to adopt the theory of the 
Tiibingen school that St Peter and St Paul and their respective 
followers were diametrically opposed to one another and that 
this Epistle, as well as the Acts of the Apostles, was written by 
some well-meaning forger of the second century, who desired to 
promote the union of the two branches of the Church by attri- 
buting Pauline views to the leading Jewish Apostle St Peter. 
Apart from this theory, which is now discredited by nearly all 


AUTHORSHIP xxi 


critics, no adequate motive can be suggested for the supposed 
forgery in St Peter’s name. The Epistle denounces no heresy, 
it supports no special system of doctrine or Church organization. 
It shews no traces of any legends or stories about St Peter’s life. 
It is addressed to an enormous district, large parts of which are 
connected with no known Apostolic missionary work. Silvanus 
is elsewhere connected with St Paul rather than St Peter. Why, 
therefore, should any forger have selected his name as the 
amanuensis, or bearer, of the Epistle? On the other hand 
Silvanus (Silas) is described in Acts xv. 22 as one of the “chief 
men among the brethren” in Jerusalem and therefore was 
certainly well known to St Peter—and unless the writer of. this 
Epistle was a man of recognized apostolic authority he would 
hardly have been likely to have commanded the services of one 
so influential as Silvanus as his subordinate. 

(2) Again in v. 13 the writer speaks of “Mark, my Son,” and 
such a claim to parental relationship to St Mark not only 
indicates the writer’s evident importance, but also agrees with 
the unanimous testimony of tradition that St Mark was in 
special attendance upon St Peter. 

(3) In v. 1 the writer describes himself as “a witness of the 
sufferings of Christ” and evidently implies that he is testifying 
what he himself heard and saw (cf. the graphic imperfects in 
which he describes our Lord’s conduct during His trial and 
Passion, ii. 23). 

(4) There are also several coincidences of thought and 
language between this Epistle and the speeches of St Peter 
as recorded in Acts. 

In his speeches St Peter constantly emphasizes the fact that 
the Apostles are “witnesses” Acts i. 22, ii. 32, iii, 15, v. 32, x. 39, 
41, cf. 1 Pet. v. 1, but in Acts the “witness” is of the resurrection 
whereas in the Epistle it is of the sufferings of Christ. 

Christ is spoken of as “the just” Acts ili, 14; 1 Pet. 
111. 18. 

His sufferings are regarded as “‘foreordained” Acts ii. 23, iv. 28, 
1 Pet. i. 20; and as having been foretold by the prophets Acts iii. 18; 

1 Pet. i. 11. : 

' The same passage about the stone disallowed by the builders 


Xxil INTRODUCTION 


becoming the headstone of the corner is quoted Acts iy. 11; 
1 Pet. ii. 4, 7. 

The Cross is spoken of as “the tree” Acts v. 30, x. 39; 
1 Pet. ii. 24 (elsewhere only Acts xiii. 29, and Gal. iii. 13 quoting 
from the O.T.). 

The descent into Hell is referred to Acts ii. 31 “That Christ’s 
soul was not left in Hell,” cf. 1 Pet. iii. 19. 

Christ is described as being raised from the dead by God 
Acts 11. 32, iii, 15, iv. 10, v. 30, x. 40; 1 Pet. 1. 21. 

The judgment of “the quick and the dead” (a phrase which 
elsewhere occurs only in 2 Tim. iv. 1) is mentioned in Acts x. 42 
and 1 Pet. iv. 5. 

The exaltation of the ascended Christ at the right hand of 
God is emphasized in Acts ii. 33 and 1 Pet. iii. 22. 

The transgression and fall of Judas to go to “his own place” 
is recognized as a fulfilment of Scripture Acts i. 16, 25, and may 
suggest the same idea of an underlying purpose of God with 
regard to the consequences of man’s guilt as is implied in 
1 Pet. ii. 8 “them which stumble at the word, being disobedient, 
whereunto they were appointed.” 

The importance of Baptism is ΕΟ ον ἸΞῚ in Acts ii. 38, 
x. 47, 48; cf. 1 Pet. ii. 21. 

God is described as “no respecter of persons” Acts x. 34; 
1 Pet. 1. 17. His choice of the Gentiles to be His “people” is 
referred to by St James as having been shewn by St Peter in 
Acts xv, 14, and Gentiles are certainly included in the “people 
of God” in 1 Pet. ii. 9, 10—and the “purification of their hearts 
by faith” Acts xv. 9 may be compared with 1 Pet. i. 22 “seeing 
ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth.” 

The chief arguments which have been urged against the 
Petrine authorship are: 


. (1) That the references to organized persecution point to a 
late date outside the probable limits of St Peter's life. In answer 
to this it may be argued (p. xliff.) that the allusions to persecution 
do not necessarily imply a persecution organized by the state, and 
that even if they are so explained they are not inconsistent with 
what we know of the Neronian persecution to which St Peter’s 
martyrdom is usually assigned. It is moreover possible (though 


AUTHORSHIP XXili 


not in the opinion of the present writer probable) that St Peter’s 
life may have been prolonged until 70—80 a.D. 


(2) That the Epistle is written in good idiomatic Greek, and 
shews an appreciation of the niceties of the language in the use 
of tenses, prepositions and synonyms. The writer must have 
been a diligent student of the LXX., probably including the 
Apocrypha, and he is saturated with its language. Besides this 
he uses sixteen Classical words not found in the LXX. or N.T. and 
several other Greek words (chiefly compounds) for which there 
is no contemporary or earlier authority. Such literary attain- 
ments, it is urged, are incredible in a Galilean peasant like 
St Peter, who is described in Acts iv. 13 as “ignorant and 
unlearned” (ἰδιώτης καὶ ἀγράμματος), and is stated by Papias and 
other early Fathers to have required the services of St Mark as 
his interpreter (ἑρμηνευτής). Dean Armitage Robinson says (Study 
of the Gospels, p. 16) “It is extremely probable that St Peter 
could not write or preach, even if he could speak at all, in any 
language but his mother tongue, the Aramaic of Galilee.” Simi- 
larly Dr Swete (St Mark, Int. p. xx) says “Simon Peter, if he 
could express himself in Greek at all, could scarcely have possessed 
sufficient knowledge of the language to address a Roman congre- 
gation with success.” On the other hand Lightfoot (Hzcursus on 
St Peter in Rome, Clement, Vol. ii. p. 494) says “When Mark is 
called ἑρμηνευτής the interpreter of Peter, the reference must be 
to the Latin, not to the Greek language. The evidence that Greek 
was spoken commonly in the towns bordering on the Sea of 
Galilee is ample, even if this had not been the necessary inference 
from the whole tenour of the New Testament.” In view of the 
large element of Greek life in Galilee, it is certainly probable that 
St Peter had some knowledge of colloquial Greek from the first. 
The epithets “ignorant and unlearned” applied to the Apostles 
need not mean more than that they had no professional training 
in Rabbinic schools. Although there is no warrant for the idea 
that the “gift of tongues” enabled the Apostles to preach at will 
in foreign languages, we may well suppose that in choosing 
St Peter as one of His messengers our Lord discerned in him 
intellectual as well as spiritual gifts and fitted him for his work 
by blessing the use which he made of those gifts. In his inter- 
course with Hellenists at Jerusalem, with Jews of the Dispersion 


XXiv INTRODUCTION 


on the day of Pentecost, and with Cornelius the centurion St Peter 
must almost certainly have spoken in Greek, yet there is no hint 
of the employment of an interpreter, and his knowledge of the 
language would steadily increase during his sojourn in Jerusalem 
and his missionary work (see 1 Cor. ix. 5) when Antioch was 
perhaps his headquarters. Moreover he would be dependent 
upon the study of the LXX. in “searching the Scriptures.” It 
is generally agreed (Edersheim, Néldeke, etc.) that Hebrew was 
only familiar to scholars in the time of our Lord. Apparently 
Jewish children were taught to read Hebrew and the lessons in 
the Synagogue were still read in Hebrew (except possibly among 
the Hellenists). But already an “interpreter” was required to 
give an Aramaic paraphrase, though this did not take written 
form in the Targums until a much later date. Hebrew Manu- 
scripts seem to have been very costly, whereas Greek Manuscripts 
were quite cheap. Thus even in Galilee it is probable that the 
LXX. was “the people’s Bible.” It would therefore be by no 
means impossible for the language of the Epistle to be chiefly 
St Peter’s own, though it is conceivable that his amanuensis 
(possibly Silvanus, as the style is quite unlike that of Mark, his 
only other known companion) may have assisted him in expressing 
his thoughts in an idiomatic form. 

(3) The comparative absence from the Epistle of allusions to 
the facts or teaching of our Lord’s earthly life. 

It is urged that if the Epistle was written by St Peter, the close 
companion of Christ, we should find more signs of a vivid remem- 
brance of His life and teaching. But it is surprising how few 
facts concerning our Lord’s life and ministry are found in any of 
the N.T. Books outside the Gospels. The story of His words 
and works must have been constantly preached by the Apostles, 
as we learn from St Luke’s preface and from the unanimous 
tradition that St Mark’s Gospel was based upon the preaching 
of St Peter. Yet in the recorded speeches of St Peter in Acts 
the only references to events before the Passion are three allusions 
to the Baptism and two to the Miracles of our Lord. Similarly 
in the Epistles of St John and of James, the Lord’s brother, very 
few facts are alluded to. Therefore the absence of such direct 
allusions in 1 Peter can only be used as an argument against its 
genuineness if the same is applied also to the other speeches and 


AUTHORSHIP XXV 


epistles attributed to Apostles. On the other hand, if they were 
late forgeries, such allusions would almost certainly have been 
introduced to support their professed Apostolic authorship. 

But although direct allusions to our Lord’s Life and Work are 
rare there are numerous indirect allusions and undesigned coin- 
cidences which support the Petrine authorship. 

As in St Peter’s speeches in Acts the author lays special stress 
upon the fact that he was a “witness” of Christ’s sufferings, and, 
although the word μάρτυς does not in itself necessarily mean a 
“spectator,” the vivid imperfects in ii. 23 seem to describe the 
author’s own recollection of the scene of Christ’s Trial and 
Passion. 

The implied contrast between himself and his readers ὃν οὐκ΄ 
ἰδόντες ἀγαπᾶτε i. 8 is not only an indirect claim to have been 
himself an eyewitness but suggests a reminiscence of our Lord’s 
words to St Thomas, Jn xx. 29. 

The instruction to gird themselves with humility to serve one 
another, v. 5, would come most naturally from one who had 
been so put to shame by the Lord Jesus in girding Himself to 
wash the disciples’ feet, when none of them would demean them- 
selves to do the slave’s duty. 

The exhortation to watch (γρηγορεῖν) and to resist the devil 
in his attempts to devour them by making them deny their 
faith in the hour of danger, v. 8, would have special force if it 
came from one who had himself fallen, in spite of his Master’s 
warning that Satan had desired to have him and his companions 
to sift them as wheat, because he failed to watch and pray, from 
one whose faith had been saved from utter failure by his Master’s 
prayer and who now that he is converted desires to strengthen 
his brethren. | 

The charge to his fellow-presbyters to shepherd (ποιμαίνειν). 
the flock of God is the same that was given to St Peter on his 
repentance, Jn xxi. 16. 

There are also numerous echoes of our Lord’s sayings in the 
Epistle. 


1 Pet. i. 4. The Christian’s Mt. xxv. 34. Inherit the king- 


inheritance reserved in heaven, dom prepared for you from the 
foundation of the world, cf. Mt. 


y. 5, vi. 20. 
I PETER c 


xxXvi 


1 Pet. 1.0. ἀγαλλιᾶσθε... -λυπη- 
θέντες ἐν ποικίλοις πειρασμοῖς. 

1 Pet. i. 8. ἀγαλλιᾶτε χαρᾷ... 
δεδοξασμένῃ.... 

1 Pet. iv. 18. καθὸ κοινωνεῖτε 
τοῖς τοῦ ῦ Χριστοῦ παθήμασιν χαίρετε, 
ἵνα.. χαρῆτε ἀγαλλιώμενοι. 

1 Pet.i.10f. The search of the 
prophets...now revealed. 


1 Pet. i. 11. The prophets 
foretold the sufferings of Messiah 
and the glory which should follow 
them. 


1 Pet. i. 18. Gird up (ἀναΐζω- 
σάμενοι) the loins of your mind. 
1 Pet. i. 17. εἰ πατέρα ἐπικα- 


λεῖσθε. 

1 Pet. 11. 2. ὡς ἀρτιγέννητα 
βρέφη 

1 Pet. ii. 6f. λίθον ἀποδεδοκι- 


μασμένον ἀκρογωνιαῖον. 

1 Pet. ii. 12. The sight of your 
good works will ‘cause men to 
glorify God. 

1 Pet. ii. 17. Fear God, honour 
the king (cf. Prov. xxiv. 21). 


1 Pet. ii. 21. Follow Christ’s 
steps by enduring suffering. 

1 Pet. ii. 23. παρεδίδου δὲ τῷ 
κρίνοντι δικαίως, cf. 1 Pet. iv. 19, 
πιστῷ κτίστῃ παρατιθέσθωσαν τὰς 
ψυχάς. 

1 Pet. ii. 25. Sheep going 
astray, cf. Is. liii. 6. 


1 Pet. iii. 9. Blessing for re- 
viling. 

1 Pet. iii. 18. ris ὁ κακώσων ; 

1 Pet. iii. 14. εἰ καὶ πάσχοιτε 
διὰ δικαιοσύνην μακάριοι. 

τὸν δὲ φόβον αὐτῶν μὴ φοβηθῆτε, 
ef. Is. viii. 12, 13. 

1 Pet. iii. 16. οἱ ἐπηρεάζοντες. 

1 Pet. iv. 7. νήψατε els προσ- 
ευχάς. 


INTRODUCTION 


Mt. v. 12. χαίρετε καὶ ἀγαλ- 
λιᾶσθε ὅτι ὁ μισθὸς ὑμῶν πολὺς ἐν 
τοῖς οὐρανοῖς" οὕτως γὰρ ἐδίωξαν 
K.T.A. 


Lk. x. 24. Many prophets... 
desired to see the things which 
ye see. 

Lk. xxiv. 26. Behoved it not 
the Messiah to suffer these things 
and to enter into his glory ? 

Lk. xxiv. 46. So it is written 
that the Messiah should suffer. 

Lk. xii. 35. Let your loins be 
girded about (περιεζωσμέναι). 

Mt. vi. 9, Lk. xi.2. The Lord’s 
Prayer. 

Mt. xviii. 3. 
ws τὰ παιδία. 

Mt. xxi. 42, from Ps. exviii. 22. 


ἐὰν μὴ γένησθε 


Mt. ν. 16. That they may see 
your good works and glorify your 
Father. 

Mt. xxii. 21. Render to Caesar 
the things that are Caesar’s and 
to God the things that are God’s. 

Mt. x. 38. Take up his cross 
and follow me. 

Lk. xxiii. 46. εἰς χεῖράς σου 
παρατίθεμαι τὸ πνεῦμά μου. 


Mt. ix. 36. Sheep having no 


| shepherd. 


Lk. xv. 4. The lost sheep. 


Lk. vi. 28. εὐλογεῖτε τοὺς κατα- 
fa Cc 
k. x. 19. οὐδὲν ὑμᾶς οὐ μὴ 


Agric ef. Lk. xxi. 18. 
Mt.v.10. μακάριοι οἱ δεδιωγμέ- 
vou ἕνεκεν δικαιοσύνης. 
Mt. x. 26. μὴ φοβήθητε αὐτούς. 


Lk. vi. 28, τῶν ἐπηρεαζόντων 
ὑμᾶς. 

Mt. xxvi. 41. γρηγορεῖτε καὶ 
προσεύχεσθε. 


AUTHORSHIP xxvii 


1 Pet. iv. 14. εἰ ὀνειδίζεσθε ἐν Mt. v. 11. μακάριοι ὅταν ὀνει- 


ὀνόματι Χριστοῦ μακάριοι. -_ δίσωσιν... «ἕνεκεν ἐμοῦ. 
1 Pet. ν. 1. Witness of suffer- Lk. xxiv. 47. Ye are witnesses 
ings fellow-sharer of glory. of these things. 


Mt. xix. 28, Lk. xxii. 30. When 
the Son of Man shall sit upon the 
throne of his glory ye also, etc. 

1 Pet. v.3. κατακυριεύοντες. Mt. xx. 25. οἱ ἄρχοντες τῶν 
ἔθνων κατακυριεύουσιν αὐτῶν. οὐχ 
οὕτως ἔσται ἐν ὑμῖν. 

1 Pet. v. 6. ταπεινώθητε.. «ἵνα Mt. xxiii. 12. ὅστις ταπεινώσει 

ὑμᾶς ὑψώσῃ. ἑαυτὸν ὑψωθήσεται. 


3. CANONICITY. 


With the exception of the First Epistle of St John, the First 
Epistle of St Peter is the only one among the Catholic Epistles 
‘of whose authority there never was any doubt in the Church.” 

It was rejected by the heretic Marcion because he only accepted 
the Pauline books of the N.T. Theodore of Mopsuestia is also 
said by Leontius to have rejected “the Epistle of St James and 
the other Catholic Epistles in order,” but probably this only 
means 2 and 3 John, 2 Peter and Jude, which were not accepted 
by the Syrian Churches. There is however some evidence which 
tends to shew that originally none of the Catholic Epistles were 
included in the Syrian Canon, but 1 John, 1 Peter and James 
had been accepted by them long before Theodore’s time. 

It is also omitted in the present text of the Muratorian 
fragment, which gives a list, possibly drawn up by Hippolytus, 
of the books accepted in the Church of Rome at the end of the 
second century. But this list, as we have it, is admitted to be 
incomplete. Some suggest that St Peter and his Epistle may 
have been mentioned in the lost portion dealing with St Mark’s 
Gospel, while Zahn thinks that a passage, which in the existing 
text deals with the Apocalypse of Peter, may have originally 
referred to his first Epistle. 

With these insignificant and doubtful exceptions the evidence 
for the reception of 1 Peter by the Church is extraordinarily 
strong. 

In the fourth century Husebius includes it among those books 
which are “generally received” (H. £. iii. 25. 2) and says that “the 

c2 


XXVlii INTRODUCTION 


Fathers of former days quoted it in their writings as indisputably 
authentic.” This statement is amply supported by facts. 

In the third century Origen (quoted by Eus. H. £, vi. 25) says 
“ Peter has left one acknowledged Epistle,” and he quotes v. 13. 

Clement of Alexandria constantly quotes the Epistle by name 
and wrote a commentary on it in his Hypotyposes, of which 
fragments in a Latin translation by Cassiodorus are still extant. 

Tertullian at Carthage also quotes it as the work of St Peter. 

Hippolytus (on Dan. iv. 59), writing in Rome or the neighbour- 
hood, quotes the words “which things the angels desire to look 
into” side by side with quotations from St Paul. 

In the second century Jrenaeus, who was brought up in Asia 
Minor and afterwards came to Lyons and Rome, and who there- 
fore represents three of the chief centres of Christendom besides 
being closely connected with Polycarp and other survivors of the 
Apostolic age, is the earliest writer who quotes the Epistle by 
name. We have also numerous traces of the Epistle: 


(a) Jn Martyrdoms such as the Acts of the Scillitan Martyrs 
(c. 180) and the letter of the Churches of Lyons and Vienne 
(177 a.p.) (Kus. H. £. v. 1). 


(Ὁ) In Apologists. Theophilus (ad Autolycum ii. 34) and 
Justin Martyr (Dial. 103) have apparent quotations from it. 


(c) Heretics such as the Valentinians both Western (Mar- 
cosians quoted by Irenaeus i. 18) and Eastern (in Clem. Al.) and 
Basilides (Clem. Al. Strom. iv. p. 600) seem to quote the Epistle. 


(da) The writer to Diognetus certainly‘ and the Didache 
probably quote words from 1 Peter. 


(ὁ) There are possible allusions to it in The Shepherd of 
Hermas. 

(f) Papias Bp of Hierapolis is stated by Eusebius (H. £. iii. 
39) to have used it as a witness, and in ii. 15 Eusebius says that 
Papias confirms the story given by Clement of Alexandria that 
St Peter approved Mark’s action in writing his Gospel, and then, 
quoting either from Clement himself or from Papias, says that 
‘Peter mentions Mark in his former Epistle which, they say, he 
composed in Rome itself, and that he signified this by describing 
the city by the metaphorical name Babylon,” This last state- 


CANONICITY ΧΧΙΧ 


ment that Babylon in the Epistle means Rome is not found in 
any of the extant writings of Clement of Alexandria and is therefore 
probably derived from Papias, and the fragment of Papias on 
Mark, quoted in Eus. iii. 39, refers back to some previous state- 
ment of his (“as I said”) about St Mark’s connexion with St Peter. 


(9) Polycarp (c. 115 a.D.) is stated by Eusebius to have 
used 1 Peter, and in the extant Epistle of Polycarp to the 
Philippians there are at least eight direct quotations from 1 Peter. 
It is true that these are not by name nor are they introduced by 
the formula εἴδοτες ὅτι which Polycarp frequently employs in 
quoting from St Paul, to whom he does refer by name, probably 
because St Paul had founded the Philippian Church and had 
himself written a letter to them. But in quoting from the O.T., 
the Gospels and Acts Polycarp’s quotations are anonymous, 
therefore there is no necessity to assume, as Harnack does, that 
Polycarp did not know the Epistle as the work of St Peter. 


(h) Clement of Rome (c. 95 A.D.) has several words and 
phrases from 1 Peter, e.g. “the precious blood” of Christ, “his 
marvellous light,” Christ’s humility (illustrated by Isaiah liii. 
and Ps. xxii.) our example (ὑπογραμμός), a word which is peculiar 
to St Peter inthe N.T. Besides this Clement has two quotations 
with the same variation from the LXX. as 1 Peter, viz. ‘Love 
covers a multitude of sins” and “God (θεός not Κύριος as the 
LXX.) resisteth the proud.” This however also occurs in the 
same form in St James and in Ignatius, Zph. v. 


(ἡ) In 2 Pet. iii. 1 the writer says “this is the second 
Epistle which I am writing to you beloved.” This book, even 
if it is not authentic, is admitted to be extremely early, and if 
we could be certain that the words refer to our 1 Peter it would 
shew that it was already known as the work of the Apostle. 
But if 2 Peter is not genuine it might of course be referring to 
some previous epistle by the same writer which is now lost. 


4. THE PLACE OF WRITING. 


In v. 13 St Peter sends the following salutations to his distant 
readers in Asia Minor ᾿Ασπάζεται t ὑμᾶς ἡ ἐν Βαβυλῶνι συνεκλεκτὴ 
καὶ Μάρκος 6 υἱός pov. In the notes on that verse reasons are 
given for adopting the view that ἡ συνεκλεκτή refers to a church 


xxx INTRODUCTION 


and not to an individual. But in either case the words ἐν 
Βαβυλῶνι must almost certainly refer to the place from which 
St Peter was writing. 

Three possible interpretations have been ae 


A. Babylon on the Euphrates. 
In favour of this it may be urged: 


(1) That in a letter literal language rather than metaphorical 
is what would naturally be expected at any rate in the more 
prosaic details of the address from which and to which the letter 
is sent. (2) That Babylon was one of the most important 
centres of the Jewish dispersion. (3) That St Peter was 
especially appointed to work among “those of the circumcision” 
and therefore would be very likely to visit such an important 
Jewish centre as Babylon was. 

In answer to these arguments it may be urged: 


(1) That the words συνεκλεκτή and vids in the immediate 
context are both to some extent metaphorical and would therefore 
suggest a metaphorical meaning for Babylon to St Peter’s readers. 
Also the opening salutation i. 1 ἐκλεκτοῖς παρεπιδήμοις διασπορᾶς 
is almost certainly metaphorical and does not refer to the 
Jewish dispersion. Moreover the letter was not sent “through 
the post” so that there was no necessity for a “post-mark” or 
address to explain the writer’s present abode. Silvanus would 
give them all necessary information. (2) That, whereas it is 
true that there had been a very large Jewish colony down to 
the reign of the Emperor Caius, we learn from Josephus (Ant, 
xviii. a) that about the year 40 a.D. great disasters fell upon the 
Babylonian Jews. Many of them were massacred, while others 
fled to Seleucia and thence to Ctesiphon. It is therefore very 
doubtful whether any considerable Jewish colony existed in 
Babylon at the time when 1 Peter was written. (3) That 
there is no evidence or tradition to connect either St Peter or 
St Mark with Babylon or the far East, nor is there any evidence 
for the existence of a Christian Church in Babylon. 


B. Babylon in Egypt. 
The only arguments for this view are: 
(1) That it affords a literal interpretation of the name. 


PLACE OF WRITING Χχχὶ 


(2) That there was a large Jewish colony in Egypt. 
(3) That tradition does connect St Mark, the companion of 
St Peter, with Egypt. 
But against this view it may be urged: 
(1) That in the first century Babylon in Egypt seems to 
have been only a fortress and military station and therefore a 
most unlikely place for the work of St Peter and his companions. 


(2) That no tradition connects St Peter’s name with Egypt. 


C. Rome. 


This seems to have been the generally accepted view until 
the Reformation, when opposition to Papal claims caused some 
Protestant writers to set aside as far as possible all connexion 
between St Peter and Rome: But there is early, wide-spread and 
unanimous tradition that St Peter suffered martyrdom in Rome, 
and fairly ample evidence for his previous work in Rome. His 
companion St Mark was certainly in Rome towards the end of 
St Paul’s imprisonment, and was again invited to come to Rome 
shortly before St Paul’s death. Tradition also describes him as 
having been St Peter’s interpreter in Rome and as writing his 
record of St Peter’s Preaching primarily for the Romans. 

Eusebius (HZ. ii. 15) in the passage referred to above (p. xxviii) 
mentions the tradition that 1 Peter was composed in Rome and 
that Rome is intended by the metaphorical name Babylon—and 
it is not improbable that he found this tradition in the writings 
either of Papias or of Clement of Alexandria to whom he had just 
referred. In the fragment of Papias on St Mark’s Gospel (Eus. 
Ἢ. E. iii. 39) Papias refers back to some previous statement of his 
own about St Mark’s connexion with St Peter, and Eusebius tells 
us that Papias made use of 1 Peter. There is no passage in the 
extant writings of Clement. of Alexandria which explains Babylon 
as meaning Rome in 1 Peter, but he does describe the Second 
Epistle of St John as being addressed “ad quandam Babyloniam 
Electam nomine, significat autem electionem Ecclesiae Sanctae.” 
The Rev. J. Chapman, O.8.B. (Journal of Theological Studies, 
July 1904), suggests that 2 John was addressed to the Church in 
Rome. The words of Clement do not however state that he 
regarded 2 John as addressed to the Church in Rome and there- 
fore do not prove that he interpreted Babylon in 1 Peter to mean 


ΧΧΧΙ INTRODUCTION 


Rome. They certainly shew that he treated the name Babylon 
as metaphorical, but if he regarded 2 John as addressed to some 
Asiatic Church he may have regarded any church in the heathen 
surroundings of some great city or of the Roman Empire as being 
“in Babylon.” 

In Jewish apocalyptic literature Babylon seems certainly 
to mean Rome—e.g. the Sibylline Oracles v. 158, the Apocalypse 
of Baruch xi, 1. The dates of these are however somewhat un- 
certain and may refer to a period after the destruction of Jerusalem 
by the Romans, which would give additional force to the name 
Babylon as applied to Rome. In the Apocalypse of St John 
however there is no clear reference to the Fall of Jerusalem, but 
Rome is described as Babylon because she is “the harlot” as 
contrasted with the Church the Bride of Christ; the centre and 
ruler of the nations; the source of iniquity and impurity ; a great 
trading centre ; enervated by luxury; the arch-persecutor of the 
saints, with whose blood she is drunken. This last feature would 
hardly be true of Rome before the Neronian persecution, but it 
is only one of many reasons for comparing Rome with Babylon. 
We have no right to assume therefore that the name of Babylon 
was first used for Rome in the Apocalypse of St John. The 
language of Old Testament prophecy about the relations of the 
successive World-powers to the Kingdom of Messiah may well 
have prompted a comparison between Rome and Babylon even 
before the outbreak of organized persecution. It is therefore 
by no means incredible that St Peter might describe Rome as 
Babylon, despite his other language about the Emperor and 
Magistrates, as early as the reign of Nero and possibly before the 
great persecution of 64 A.D. 

The arguments in favour of Rome may be summarized as 
follows : 


(1) The widespread tradition that St Peter did work in 
Rome. (2) The presence of St Mark, who is connected with 
Rome in St Paul’s Epistles, and with St Peter in Rome in early 
tradition. (3) The objections to interpreting the name Babylon 
literally, either of Babylon on the Euphrates or of Babylon 
in Egypt, force us to adopt some metaphorical meaning for the 
name. (4) Such metaphorical use is suggested: (a) by the 
immediate context συνεκλεκτή, (6) by the general tenour of the 


PLACE OF WRITING ΧΧΧΙ 


Epistle in which the titles and experiences of Israel are applied 
to the Christian Church. (δ), ΠΥ the name is metaphorical it 
would naturally be understood to mean Rome, and its appro- 
priateness would be easily recognizable to St Peter’s readers 
even before the Apocalypse of St John. (6) No other inter- 
pretation except Rome seems to have been known to early 
writers. (7) The general tone of the Epistle, especially in 
regard to persecution, duty towards the state, and the univer- 
sality of St Peter’s teaching would suggest that he was writing 
from Rome. 


5. Tue DATE oF THE EPISTLE. 


Evidence for the date of the Epistle may be deduced from the 
following considerations. 
A. The apparent traces which it shews of other N.T. books. 

(1) The Epistle of St James (see p. li ff). The most 
probable date of St James’ death is 62 a.pD. but his Epistle 
may have been written earlier. 

(2) The Epistle to the Romans (see p. Ix ἢ), which was 
probably written in the spring of 58 a.p. (though some would 
date it 56 or 57 A.D.). 

(3) The Epistle to the Ephesians (see p. lxiv ff), which was 
probably written towards the close of St Paul’s imprisonment 
in Rome ?61 or 62 A.D. 


(4) The Epistle to the Hebrews, which Westcott dates 
64—67 A.D., but the coincidences with Hebrews are too uncertain 
to form a serious argument. 

It is not necessary to assume that these Epistles were already 
familiar to St Peter’s readers, but only that St Peter himself 
knew them. He had been closely connected with James, the 
Lord’s brother, in Jerusalem, and if he wrote from Rome would 
certainly have access to Romans, and a copy of Ephesians which 
was written from Rome would probably be preserved there. 
Moreover St Mark, who was St Peter’s companion at the time 
of writing, was certainly with St Paul when he wrote to the 
Colossians (Col. iv. 10) and was probably therefore present when 
_ Ephesians was written, as Colossians and Ephesians were both 
despatched by the same messenger Tychicus, and Ephesians is 


XXXiV INTRODUCTION 


almost certainly referred to in Col. iv. 16 as the letter which 
the Colossians are to exchange with the Church in Laodicea. 
Possibly, as Dr Chase suggests (Hastings’ D. of B. iii. 778), 
St Paul may have himself been still in Rome when St Peter 
reached the city. 

If then a knowledge of the Epistle to the Ephesians is implied 
in 1 Peter the date cannot be earlier than 61 or 62 but need not 
necessarily be much later. 


B. The Spread of Christianity which it implies in so many 
of the provinces of Asia Minor. 


Ramsay (Church in the Roman Empire, p. 285) says “they that 
make St Peter write to the congregations of Pontus during Nero’s 
reign remove the story of early Christianity from the sphere 
of history into that of the marvellous and supernatural.” 

“Tf Christianity,” he says, “was extending along the main line 
of intercourse across the Empire between 50 and 60, it is incon- 
ceivable that, before a.p. 64, (1) it had spread away from that 
line across the country into the northern provinces; (2) so 
much organization and intercommunication had grown up as 
is implied in 1 Peter.” 

In answer to this sweeping criticism it may be urged: 

(a) That the story of the spread of Christianity recorded in 
Acts or implied in St Paul’s Epistles is confessedly incomplete 
and is practically limited to St Paul’s own work or influence, 
and parts of this even are only incidentally alluded to, 6... the 
evangelization of the province of Asia (Acts xix. 10) and the 
spread of Christianity in Rome before St Paul’s visit. 


(Ὁ) That we have not the slightest warrant for supposing 
that during all this time other Apostles or Missionaries were 
doing nothing to fulfil their Master’s commission “to go into all 
the world.” 

(c) That the spread of Christianity in the provinces of 
Asia and Galatia is described in Acts and St Paul’s Epistles. 
Therefore only Pontus, Bithynia and Cappadocia remain to be 
accounted for. : 


(α) That Ramsay himself (p. 10) says that one great line 
by which the trade of Central Asia was carried to Rome was by 


DATE OF THE EPISTLE XXXV 


the road from the Cilician gates through Tyana and Caesarea of 
Cappadocia to Amisos, the great harbour of the Black Sea in 
Pontus. Therefore this would be a natural line for the spread of 
the Gospel. 


(e) That Jews from Pontus and Cappadocia were present 
on the day of Pentecost, and presumably therefore visited Jeru- 
salem on other later occasions. Therefore some of them or other 
traders may have helped to introduce Christianity in those 
districts. 

(f) That St Paul himself on hissecond journey contemplated 
a missionary journey in Bithynia (Acts xvi. 7), evidently regarding 
it as a suitable sphere for work. It is not, therefore, incredible 
that Silas, who was his companion on that journey, may have 
afterwards carried out the plan which was then abandoned. 

The description of Silas in 1 Pet. v. 12 as ὑμῖν rod πιστοῦ 
ἀδελφοῦ would naturally suggest that he had already worked 
among the readers of the Epistle. 

(g) That Aquila, who was certainly an ardent missionary 
in Ephesus and Rome and was evidently widely known in “all 
the Churches of the Gentiles” (see Rom. xvi. 4), was himself a 
Jew of Pontus and may not improbably have visited his native 
country during his sojourn in Asia. 

(A) That the Epistle does not necessarily imply that all the 
districts named were fully Christianized or that all the Churches 
in them were as yet organized. Possibly some of them had not 
yet regular presbyters. 

Therefore, while we may admit that a late date would leave 
more time for the spread of Christianity over so wide an area of 
which we are told so little in the N.T., there appears to be nothing 
either “marvellous” or “supernatural” involved in the supposition 
that the Epistle was written in the reign of Nero. 


©. The relation of the State towards Christianity implied in 
the Epistle, and the language used about the Emperor and Magis- 
trates. 

In order to form a fair estimate of this question it is necessary 
to compare the notices of persecution contained in 1 Peter with 
_ the evidence afforded (a) by other Books of the N.T., (ὁ) by other 
accounts of the imperial policy towards Christianity. 


XXXVi INTRODUCTION 


Notices of persecution and suffering for the sake of Christ in the 
New Testament. 

In the Acts of the Apostles persecution against Christians is 
almost entirely instigated by the Jews. 

The Sanhedrin arrested, imprisoned and flogged the Apostles, 
and put St Stephen to death. Saul was allowed to make a house 
to house visitation and had a mandate from the High Priest to 
extend his work of persecution as far as Damascus, apparently 
unchecked by the Roman Procurator. 

Agrippa I executed James the Son of Zebedee and imprisoned 
St Peter. 

Henceforward the hatred of the Jews was mainly directed 
against St Paul. His death was plotted at Damascus (Acts ix. 23, 
24; 2 Cor. xi. 32) and at his first visit to Jerusalem (Acts ix. 29). 
On his first journey he was expelled from Antioch in Pisidia and 
Iconium (Acts xiii. 50, xiv. 5) and almost stoned to death by the 
mob at Lystra (Acts xiv. 19). On his second journey he was 
flogged and imprisoned by the magistrates at Philippi (xvi.) on 
the charge of “teaching customs not lawful for Romans to observe.” 
At Thessalonica the politarchs merely bound over Jason and his 
friends to keep the peace, although a political charge had been 
brought (xvii. 7—9). At Corinth, when a purely religious charge 
was brought, Gallio, the proconsul, dismissed the case as being no 
offence against Roman Law (xviii. 12—16). On his third journey 
St Paul and the Christians were attacked because they interfered 
with the trade of the silversmiths at Ephesus, but the town clerk 
repressed any attempt at mob-violence (xix. 23—41). From 
Corinth St Paul was obliged to return by land to escape a plot 
of the Jews (xx. 3). At his last visit to Jerusalem he was seized 
on the charge of having taken Greeks into the Temple, but Lysias 
the chief captain rescued him from the mob and, discovering that 
he was a Roman citizen, protected him against the plots of the 
Jews to kill him, by sending him to be tried before Felix. There 
the charges were sedition, heresy and sacrilege, to the first and 
third of which St Paul successfully pleaded “not guilty,” and, 
although he owned himself to be “a Nazarene,” 7.e. a Christian, 
Felix, Festus and Agrippa all admitted that he had “done nothing 
worthy of bonds or of death.” Having exercised his privilege as 
a Roman citizen St Paul was sent to Rome for trial but was 


DATE OF THE EPISTLE XXXVii 


leniently treated by the officials and remained in custodia militaris 
for two years. But he confidently expected release as soon as 
his case was heard and only mentions martyrdom as an unlikely 
contingency (Philippians ii. 17). Not until his second imprison- 
ment, probably in the reign of Nero, does St Paul describe himself 
as being “in bonds as a malefactor” (2 Tim. ii. 9) and “ready to 
be offered” (iv. 6). 

Besides these recorded instances St Paul describes himself 
(2 Cor. vi. 5) as having suffered blows and imprisonments and 
(2 Cor. xi. 23, 24) as having been five times scourged by the Jews 
and thrice beaten with rods, probably by provincial magistrates. 
Thus on several occasions not only Jews but the heathen mob 
took part in the attack. The intervention of the magistrates 
was also involved. 

Other Christians besides St Paul were evidently exposed to 
persecution. Thus (Acts xiv. 22) Paul and Barnabas warned 
their converts in Asia Minor that “we must pass through many 
afflictions to enter the Kingdom of God.” In 1 Thess. i. 6, iii. 3, 
2 Thess. 1. 4—6 St Paul refers to the afflictions which they have 
suffered at the hands of their fellow-countrymen and urges them 
not to be shaken by them. He asks the Galatians (iii. 4) “Have 
ye suffered so many things in vain?” (evidently from Jewish 
opponents). 

The Philippians are urged not to be “terrified by their 
adversaries.” It is a sign of God’s favour to be allowed to suffer 
in Christ’s behalf. They are taking part in the same contest of 
suffering which they formerly saw and now hear of St Paul himself 
being engaged in (Phil. i. 28—30). Aquila and Priscilla must on 
some occasion have incurred danger of death to save St Paul as 
they are described as having “risked their own necks for his 
life” (Rom. xvi. 4). Andronicus and Junias (Rom. xvi. 7), 
Aristarchus (Col. iv. 10) and Epapbras (Philemon 23) are 
described as St Paul’s “fellow-prisoners.” In 2 Cor. xi. 23 
St Paul, in claiming that his share of persecution, blows and 
imprisonments has been “more abundant” than that of others, 
does imply that other Christians had also suffered, though to 
a less degree than himself. - 

St James, writing probably not later than 62 a.p. to “the 
' twelve tribes of the dispersion” (which may mean the whole 


XXXVIli INTRODUCTION 


Christian Church and not merely Jewish Christians in the 
neighbourhood of Palestine), reminds them that the rich blas- 
pheme the good name which Christians bear and drag them | 
before courts of law, but he encourages his readers to endure 
manifold trials as a testing of their faith (Jas i. 2, 3), using the 
selfsame phrases which St Peter employs. 

The writer to the Hebrews (x. 32) reminds them how in the 
early days of their Christianity they had been made a spectacle 
by sufferings, reproaches and afflictions ; how they had sympathized 
with those in bonds and submitted patiently to the plundering 
of their goods. He urges them to imitate Christ in facing the 
dangers which are now in store for them. They must accept 
suffering as a loving chastisement from God, emulating the 
heroes of faith in the O.T, They have not yet resisted unto blood 
(xil. 4), but they are bidden to remember those who are in bonds 
and those who are suffering hardship because they themselves are 
“in the body” and may therefore ere long share the same fate. 
This may possibly refer to the Neronian persecution, and in that 
case is an indication of the way in which it spread into the 
provinces. In the Apocalypse, whether it refers to the period just 
after Nero’s reign or to the reign of Domitian, we have evidence 
for a more organized persecution. Many have been slain for the 
word of God vi. 9, including Antipas at Pergamos ii. 13. Rome 
is drunken with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus xvii. 6, xviii. 24. 


The Attitude of the State towards Christianity. 


The policy of Rome towards the subject-nations of the Empire 
was to allow each of them to retain their own religion on the 
following conditions: (1) that it was a national religion and was 
content to take its place side by side with other national religions, 
without claiming to be absolute, (2) that it did not cause political 
or other disturbance, (3) that it managed its own religious dis- 
putes. Now Judaism did of course claim to be absolute, and 
repudiated all other Gods than Jehovah as dumb idols, but at 
the same time it was so intensely national that the Romans not 
only allowed it toleration but even prentet special privileges and 
exemptions to the Jews. 

At first therefore, when Christianity was regarded by Roman 


DATE OF THE EPISTLE ΧΧΧΙ͂Χ 


officials, like Gallio, as “a question of words and names and 
Jewish Law,” it shared the same protection as Judaism. On 
several occasions, as we have seen, the magistrates restrained 
the attacks made upon St Paul. 

In 2 Thessalonians ii. 6, 7 St Paul regards the policy of the 
reigning Emperor apparently as a restraining influence which 
makes for toleration. 

In Romans xiii. 1—4 he describes civil magistrates as God’s 
delegates for avenging wrongdoing, whose praise may be 
. obtained by doing what is good. Nevertheless there was from 
the very first an inevitable antagonism between the Empire and 
the Church. The bigotry of the Jews and their open hostility 
towards Christians would soon make it obvious that Christianity 
was no mere sect of Judaism. As an absolute religion which 
could admit of no compromise with idolatry, no worship of the 
Emperor side by side with that of Jehovah, it could not fit into 
the Roman system any more than Judaism. Besides this it was 
not even a national or hereditary religion but a new “superstition,” 
which soon came to be regarded as ἃ “pestilent superstition” for 
various reasons. It claimed to provide a universal bond of 
brotherhood, higher and more paramount than that of the 
Empire, whereas under Nero Emperor-worship was steadily 
growing stronger as the necessary link to unite the many 
nationalities and many gods of the subject-nations. It also 
caused divisions in families and interfered with the religious 
rites which formed so large a part of social and municipal life. 

In many cases, as at Philippi and Ephesus and afterwards (as 
Pliny shews) in Bithynia, trades which were connected with 
idolatry were considerably affected by the spread of Christianity. 
Again no conscientious Christian could take part in the public 
games and religious festivals or acquiesce in the criminal profli- 
gacy of their neighbours. Consequently Christians came to be 
regarded as gloomy and morose, “enemies of the human race,” 
or else as officious “ busybodies.” Having thus incurred popular 
odium the Christians would often be compelled to hold their 
meetings in secret, and the foul imagination of malicious enemies 
ere long interpreted the Eucharist and Agape or Love Feast as 
involving cannibalism and incestuous lust. Even as early as 
‘St Paul’s arrival in Rome the Jews there told him that their only 


xl INTRODUCTION 


knowledge of Christianity was that it was everywhere spoken 
against (Acts xxviii. 22), and according to Tacitus it was because 
the Christians were already hated by the mob for their supposed 
crimes, and were regarded as guilty wretches deserving the 
extremest form of punishment, that Nero a few years later 
selected them as scapegoats on whom to vent the popular fury 
and divert suspicion from himself in connexion with the great 
conflagration in Rome. 

From the first therefore Christianity had been an unlawful 
religion and one which was inevitably in conflict with the state. _ 
No official edict was really necessary to legalize the punishment 
of Christians, and it is quite possible that persecution may have 
been countenanced in the provinces by some magistrates before 
the outbreak of the Neronian persecution. Naturally however 
the policy of Nero in treating Christians as outlaws would be 
regarded as giving imperial sanction to persecution, and the 
Emperor’s example would soon be widely followed in the provinces. 
In the Neronian persecution it is disputed whether Christians 
suffered merely for their religion “as Christians” or only for 
other crimes which were attributed to them. Some forty years 
later in the reign of Trajan Pliny, the governor of Bithynia, in 
his letter to the Emperor shews that he had himself put Christians 
to death for the name only, if they obstinately refused to recant, 
and the rescript of Trajan in reply gives imperial sanction to 
this procedure, implying that it was not necessary to prove any 
further crime beyond the fact of being a Christian. But Christians, 
he says, are not to be sought out, and anonymous accusations are 
not to be accepted. Ramsay however (Church in the Roman 
Empire, p. 256) argues that punishment for the name of Christian 
alone was not in vogue until about the time of Vespasian 
(70-79 A.D.), whereas previously some further crime was always 
alleged. But there is no sufficient evidence of any such change 
of policy, and the account of the Neronian persecution given by 
Tacitus seems most naturally to imply that as early as 64 A.D. 
Christians in Rome suffered for the name only. The object of 
Nero, he says, was to divert suspicion from himself of having 
caused the great firein Rome. This he could most easily do by 
shifting the odium on to the Christians who were already generally 
hated and credited with all kinds of crimes, and as votaries of 


DATE OF THE EPISTLE xli 


an unlawful religion they could be tortured or executed to satisfy 
the popular thirst for vengeance. Several of those who were first 
arrested, says Tacitus, “confessed.” What was the nature of this 
confession? Surely not that they were guilty of arson but that 
they were Christians. The number of victims was extremely 
large (ingens multitudo), including, according to Clement of Rome, 
matrons, girls and slaves. Now it is obviously impossible that 
all of these could have been legally proved guilty of arson, and 
Tacitus says that they were charged not so much with arson as - 
with “hatred to the human race.” This probably refers to their 
religious views, which made Christians run counter to all the 
religious ideas, the social festivities, and the moral standard of 
the times. So also Suetonius in his account of the Neronian 
persecution says that Christians were punished as votaries of a 
new and pestilent superstition. 

In the light of this evidence for the persecution of Christians 
both before and during the reign of Nero, we must now consider 
whether the allusions to persecution in 1 Peter necessarily imply 
that the Neronian persecution was in progress or even demand a 
later date. 

In i. 6, 7 St Peter describes his readers as having been put to 
grief for the time being, if so it must needs be, by manifold trials 
which are a testing of their faith. The keywords of this passage 
however ποικίλοις πειρασμοῖς and δοκίμιον τῆς πίστεως are appa- 
rently borrowed from St James, who probably died in 62 Α.Ὁ. and 
therefore wrote before the outbreak of the Neronian persecution. 
Therefore as borrowed by St Peter the words need not imply any 
persecution organized by the state. 

Similarly in iv. 12 the phrase “fiery trial” (πύρωσις) is a 
_ metaphor from the refining of gold, like δοκίμιον in i. 7, and does 
not necessarily refer to death by burning such as was inflicted by 
Nero. 

In ii. 19 Christian slaves are described as suffering unjustly at 
the hands of capricious masters, but here “suffering” is defined as 
being “buffeted.” 

In iii. 14 the possible contingency (εἰ καὶ πάσχοιτε) of suffering 
for righteousness’ sake is regarded as a blessed thing—with an 
evident allusion to our Lord’s words Mt. v. 10. But such 
suffering is regarded as by no means inevitable. It may be 

I PETER d 


xlii INTRODUCTION 


averted by a zealous devotion to what is good (iii, 13). If 
Christians only maintain a good conscience by persistent good 
conduct those who revile them will be shamed into silence (iii. 16). 
Suffering for righteousness’ sake therefore is only an uncertain 
contingency, expressed by the optative which is very rare in the 
N.T., εἰ καὶ πάσχοιτε, “supposing that you should be called upon to 
suffer,” “if God’s will should require that of you” (εἰ θέλοι iii. 17). 

In ii. 12 Christians are described as being spoken against as 
. evil-doers or malefactors (κακοποιοί), but the spectacle of their 
good deeds will cause their heathen neighbours to glorify God in 
“the day of visitation” (see note on ii. 12). 

In iii. 9 They are not to requite evil for evil or reviling for 
reviling. 

In iv. 4 Men revile Christians and regard them as fanatics for 
refusing to join in the profligate excesses of the day. 

In iv. 14 It is a blessed thing to suffer reproach in the name 
of Christ. 

In iv. 19 Any who suffer according to the will of God are 
bidden to commit their lives by doing good to the safe keeping 
of God as a faithful Creator who may be trusted to guard His 
own handiwork. 

None of the above passages necessarily imply any organized 
persecution conducted by the state. They might be used of the 
insults, abuse, social boycotting, unjust accusations, and rough 
usage such as Christian converts in a heathen country have 
constantly had to endure. There are however other passages to 
which Ramsay (Church in the Roman Empire, pp. 280—281, 
290—295) appeals as clearly pointing to organized official per- 
secution. 

(a) In iii, 15, in a passage dealing with suffering for righteous- 
ness’ sake, Christians are bidden to be “always ready to give an 
answer (ἀπολογία) to every man that asketh you a reason con- 
cerning the hope that is in you.” This, says Ramsay, implies 
persecution after trial and question. Now it is quite true that 
ἀπολογία is used of a legal defence in Acts xxv. 16 and 2 Tim. iv. 16, 
and such legal defence might be included in St Peter’s use of the 
word. But the words dei “at any time” and παντί “to any 
person” imply that the reference is more general, and ἀπολογία 
is used in a non-legal sense in Acts xxii. 1 and 1 Cor. ix. 3 and 


DATE OF THE EPISTLE xliii 


most probably in Phil. i..7, 16, though the last passage might 
possibly refer to St Paul’s first trial. It can hardly therefore 
be assumed that St Peter is necessarily referring to legal trials. 
His language may well mean that Christians are always to be 
ready to shew their colours and give a reason for their hope when 
any opponent challenges them, cf. Col. iv. 6 “that ye may know 
how to answer each one.” 


(6) Again in iv. 14—16 Ramsay (p. 292) argues that “the 
words ‘Let none of you suffer as a murderer or as a thief (sic)... 
but if (a man suffer) as a Christian let him glorify God in this 
name’ have no satisfactory meaning, unless those to whom they 
are addressed are liable to execution: the verb in the second 
clause is understood from the preceding clause and must have 
the same sense”; and (p. 281) he argues from this same passage 
that Christians suffer for the Name pure and simple, which, 
according to his theory, was not the case in the reign of Nero. 
He would therefore date the Epistle about 75—80 a.p. (cf. p. xlvi). 
In this case the Petrine authorship can only be maintained by 
supposing that St Peter’s life was prolonged beyond the reign of 
Nero. Again (p. 293) Ramsay argues that “in the Roman Empire 
the right of capital punishment belonged only to a small number 
of high officials. No Asian Christian was liable to suffer death 
except through the action of the governor of his province. If 
therefore the Christians are liable to suffer unto death, persecu- 
tion by the state must be in process.” 

In answer to these arguments it may be urged: 

(1) That, even if the passage indisputably proved that the 
penalty of death was inflicted for the Name of Christian pure 
and simple, it may refer to the Neronian persecution or possibly 
even to earlier persecution in which provincial magistrates them- 
selves anticipated the policy of Nero towards Christians—or 
connived at lynch law on the part of the mob. 

(2) That, even if “the Name of Christian pure and simple” 
is implied as a legal charge in this passage, it cannot be proved 
that the penalty of death was necessarily inflicted. 

Of the earlier charges specified “murder” would no doubt be 
punished with death—but “theft” would surely not incur that 
penalty ordinarily, while κακοποιός is too general a term to be 


d2 


xliv INTRODUCTION 


limited to abominable offences or criminal acts necessarily 
punishable with death—and ἀλλοτριοεπίσκοπος (which probably 
refers to tampering with other peoples’ concerns—interfering 
with their families or their trade) can hardly have constituted 
a capital offence under Roman Law in ordinary cases. It seems 
therefore by no means a conclusive argument that the word 
“suffer,” as supplied in the second clause, must imply death 
because it would bear that sense in one of the preceding cases. 
The balance of probability, so far as this particular passage is 
concerned, seems to be rather on the other side. Moreover 
verse 14 speaks of “being reproached in the name of Christ,” 
and this also suggests that the suffering intended does not refer 
exclusively or even primarily to death. Again, whereas the 
first three words are coupled together with 7, implying that they 
are all legal charges, ἀλλοτριοεπίσκοπος is separated from them 
by the repetition of ὡς, so that it may be intended as a ground 
of complaint or dislike rather than as a definite legal charge, and 
in that case it is hardly safe to assume that “the Name of 
Christian pure and simple” was a definite legal charge. 


(ec) In v. 8 Christians are bidden to “be sober, be vigilant, 
because their adversary the devil goeth about seeking to devour.” 
This passage does probably refer chiefly to the temptation to 
deny their Faith in the hour of danger and persecution, because 
the next verse speaks of the same experiences of suffering as 
being accomplished in the Christian brotherhood in the world. 
This certainly shews that the sufferings of the Asian Christians 
were not unique but were shared by other Christians elsewhere, 
but it is hardly sufficient to prove that an organized persecution 
was in progress affecting the whole Church simultaneously. The 
word ἀντίδικος might be used of Satan as “the accuser of the 
brethren” before God (Rev. xii. 10) without necessarily implying 
that Satan is represented by some human prosecutor in an 
actual legal trial on earth, and the words περιπατεῖ ζητῶν are 
part of the simile of the prowling lion in search of prey and need 
not necessarily imply that Christians are being “sought out for 
trial by Roman officials,” as Ramsay suggests (p. 281). If however 
the words are thus literally interpreted they would merely point 
to a date before the rescript of Trajan which forbade such search 
for Christians. 


DATE OF THE EPISTLE xlv 


The following conclusions may therefore be suggested : 


(1) that the Epistle does not-necessarily imply that an official 
persecution organized by the state was in progress, although 
some passages would certainly admit of that interpretation ; 


(2) that if such organized persecution is implied the evidence 
is not inconsistent with what is known of the Neronian persecu- 
tion. 

Dr Hort (1 Pet. Int. pp. 1 and 3) says that the Epistle “was 
written during a time of rising persecution to men suffering under 
it” and he suggests that this was either 


(1) the persecution begun by Nero, or (2) a persecution 
arising out of it, or (3) a persecution in Asia Minor, independent 
of any known persecution bearing an Emperor’s name and per- 
haps even a little earlier than Nero’s persecution, as may be 
suggested by the language used in the Epistle about the Emperor 
and his officers. 

The Emperor and magistrates are described in language, 
evidently borrowed from Romans xiii. 1 ff, as God’s agents 
to exact vengeance on evil-doers but for the praise of them 
that do well. With regard to this point Dr Chase (Hastings’ 
D. of B., vol. iii., p. 785) argues “that a Christian teacher 
writing from Rome after Nero’s attack on the Church to fellow- 
Christians in the provinces should adopt St Paul’s language” 
[which was written when he still regarded the Roman State as 
the “restraining power” and still looked to the Emperor as the 
protector of the Church] “only making it more explicit and em- 
phasizing its hopefulness seems inconceivable.” 

In answer to this argument it might be urged : 


(a) That St Peter expressly points his readers to Christ 
as the example of patience under injustice, and Our Lord 
recognized the authority of Pilate as being “given him from 
above,” despite the judicial crime in which he was taking part. 
He also told His followers that they would be brought before 
rulers and kings for His name’s sake, and yet bade them bless 
and pray for their persecutors. 


(6) That later Fathers, who certainly wrote during or after 
‘periods of violent persecution, in which the state had shewn the 


xlvi INTRODUCTION 


greatest: cruelty and injustice towards Christians, nevertheless 
use equally strong language about civil rulers. 

E.g. Clement of Rome, c. 96 A.D., says (cc. lx. lxi.) ‘Give concord 
and peace to us and to all that dwell on the earth—while we 
render obedience to Thine Almighty and most excellent Name 
and to our rulers and governors upon the earth. Thou, O Lord 
and Master, hast given them the power of sovereignty through 
Thine excellent and unspeakable might, that we, knowing the 
glory and honour which Thou hast given them, may submit 
ourselves unto them, in nothing resisting Thy will.” 

Still it must be admitted that it would have been easier for 
St Peter to speak so hopefully about civil rulers before the 
outbreak of the Neronian persecution rather than during or 
after it, and this would add some slight support to other con- 
siderations which also point to an early date for the Epistle. 


Ὁ. The probable date (a) of St Peter's death, (b) of an occasion 
when St Peter, St Mark and Silvanus were present together in 
Rome, as is implied in v. 12, 13. 

(2) Ramsay, who dates this Epistle 75—80 A.pD., suggests 
that St Peter’s life may have been prolonged to that date on 
the following grounds: (1) that the evidence for St Peter's 
martyrdom in the reign of Nero is not very early; (2) that 
there must be some foundation in fact for the strong tradition 
that St Peter worked for a long time in Rome, whereas if he died 
in the reign of Nero it is hardly possible that he can have resided 
long in Rome. 

The evidence for St Peter’s death in the reign of Nero is as 
follows : 


(1) Clement of Rome (c. 96 A.D.) (cc. v., vi.) couples the 
martyrdoms of St Peter and St Paul closely together, placing 
that of St Peter first, and says that “to them was gathered 
a great company of the elect, who, being the victims of jealousy, 
by reason of many outrages and tortures became a noble example 
among us.” 

It is argued (Dr Chase, Hastings’ D. of B., iii. 769) that “the 
great company” must refer to the Neronian victims, and as they 
are described as being “gathered to” (συνηθροίσθη) Peter and 
Paul it is suggested that those two Apostles were among the 


DATE OF THE EPISTLE — xivii 


earliest victims and must consequently have been put to death 
in A.D. 64 or 65, as the great fire which served as the pretext for 
Nero’s persecution happened in July 64 a.p. 

In answer to this it may be urged : 


(a) That when once Nero had set the example of persecuting 
the Christians such persecution was more or less chronic, and 
therefore later victims than those of Nero’s reign may be in- 
cluded in “the great company.” 


(6) That Peter and Paul are named first, not necessarily 
because they were the earliest victims, but because they alone 
were Apostles and therefore the ringleaders to whom both earlier 
and later victims might be described as being “gathered.” 


(6) That the traditional date for St Paul’s death is 67 or 
68 A.D., i.e. three or four years after the fire when the first violence 
of the Neronian persecution had spent itself. If persecution was 
. more or less chronic from 64 A.D. onwards such later date for 
St Paul’s martyrdom is by no means impossible and is more 
consistent with the evidence of the Pastoral Epistles. The ex- 
tended missionary work implied in them can with difficulty be 
accounted for if the period between his release from his first 
imprisonment and his death was only two or three years, 
Again in 2 Tim. St Paul speaks of his “first defence” and yet 
contemplates surviving till the winter and invites Timothy and 
Mark to join him in Rome. . This evidence implies a lengthy 
remand and comparative safety for other well known Christians 
to visit Rome and is hardly consistent with the theory that 
St Paul suffered in the first outbreak of the Neronian persecution. 

It is therefore possible, or even probable, that neither St Peter 
nor St Paul were present in Rome in 64 A.D. and that consequently 
they escaped martyrdom until a later date. 

Still Clement does couple the martyrdoms of St Peter and 
St Paul together and that of St Paul was almost certainly in 
Nero’s reign. 

(2) Dionysius of Corinth (c. 170) (as quoted by Eus. H. Z. ii. 
25. 8) after speaking of the joint work of Peter and Paul in 
Corinth, says that, “having gone together (or ‘to the same 
place’) to Italy and taught, they suffered martyrdom at the 
same time.” 


xlvili | INTRODUCTION 


(3) Tertullian (c. 200) (Scorp. 15) says “Nero was the first 
to stain the rising faith with blood at Rome.” “Then Peter is 
‘girded by another’ when he is bound to the cross.” Then Paul 
etc. 

(4) Origen (c. 250) (ap. Hus. iii. 1) mentions St Peter’s death 
by crucifixion in Rome before St Paul’s martyrdom, and dates 
the latter in the reign of Nero. 

(5) Commodian (c. 250) (Carmen Apologeticum 820 f.) speaks 
of Peter and Paul as suffering in Rome under Nero. 

(6) The Chronicon of Eusebius. The Armenian version puts 
the Neronian persecution, when the Apostles Peter and Paul 
suffered martyrdom in Rome, in the thirteenth year of Nero, 
i.e. 67—68 a.D., while Jerome’s version gives the fourteenth year 
of Nero, i.e. 68 A.D., as the date. 

(7) The Catholic Acts of Peter (ed. Lipsius, p. 172 f.) 
(probably fifth century but based upon a second century 
document) connect with St Peter’s death a prophecy that 
“Nero should be destroyed not many days hence.” 

(8) The lists of Roman Bishops give Linus as the first Bishop 
after the Apostles with 12 years’ episcopate, then Anacletus as 
second Bishop with 12 years’ episcopate, followed by Clement 
as third Bishop. Eusebius dates the accession of Clement in 
92 a.D. which would place the appointment of Linus in 68 Α.Ὁ., 
but Lightfoot would date Clement’s accession 86—88 A.D. which 
would place Linus 62—64 A.D. 

If Linus is regarded as succeeding to the Bishopric on 
St Peter’s death this would corroborate the Neronian date for 
the martyrdom. 

Irenaeus however describes Linus as being appointed Bishop 
by St Peter and St Paul, the founders of the Church in Rome, 
and no writers of the first two centuries or more describe 
St Peter himself as Bishop of Rome. Therefore Linus may 
have been Bishop in St Peter’s lifetime, and in that case his 
accession affords no clue for the date of St Peter’s martyrdom. 

(9) It seems probable that St Mark’s written record of 
St Peter’s preaching (which was either our second Gospel or 
at least the basis of it) was written before the Fall of Jerusalem 
in A.D. 70, and Irenaeus states that Mark wrote it after the ἔξοδος 


DATE OF THE EPISTLE xlix 


of Peter and Paul, which probably means after their death. 
Clement of Alexandria, Orige.and Jerome on the other hand 
represent St Mark as writing during St Peter’s lifetime. But 
-Irenaeus is more likely to represent the tradition current in 
Rome, and St Peter’s death would make the need of a written 
record much stronger. Moreover “the presbyter” quoted by 
Papias (Kus. iii. 39) describes St Mark as having to rely upon 
his memory of what St Peter preached, and this suggests that 
St Peter was dead. 

The general consensus of tradition therefore seems to place 
St Peter’s martyrdom in the reign of Nero, and this would make 
68 the latest possible date for the Epistle. 


(Ὁ) We have next to consider the most probable date at 
which St Peter, St Mark and Silvanus were in Rome together. 

The apparent traces of the Epistle to the Ephesians contained 
in 1 Peter make it unnecessary to consider any earlier date than 
61 A.D., and reasons have been given above (see p. xviii f.) for the 
view that St Peter had not worked in Rome before that date. 
On the other hand there is a strong tradition that St Peter 
worked for a considerable time in Rome, and there is some evidence 
that St Peter and St Paul worked together in Rome. There is 
therefore reasonable ground for presuming that St Peter arrived 
in Rome very soon after Colossians and Ephesians were written 
and before St Paul left the city. We know from Col. iv. 10 that 
St Mark was already in Rome, ‘touching whom,” St Paul says, 
“ve received commandments, if he come unto you receive him.” 

This suggests three questions : 


(a) What were these “commandments”? (b) Why had it 
been necessary to send them? (c) Why does St Paul go out 
of his way to refer to them? 

A plausible answer is (a) that the commands were the words 
which follow, namely instructions which had been sent to the 
Colossians (probably by St Paul himself) to receive St Mark if 
he passed that way on his journey to Rome; (b) that such 
instructions were necessary because St Mark, as ἃ previous 
deserter, whom St Paul had declined to accept as a fellow- 
worker (possibly, as Dr Chase suggests, because St Mark was 
not in full sympathy with his policy towards the Gentiles) 


1 INTRODUCTION 


might well have been coldly received unless his journey was 
known to have St Paul’s full concurrence, (c) that St Paul 
desired to shew the Colossians how fully St Mark’s visit to 
Rome had justified the hopes which he had formed in preparing 
for it. As one of the leading representatives “of the Circum- 
cision” St Mark had been a great comfort to him at a time 
when others were preaching Christ out of faction (Phil. i. 17). 

If this explanation be accepted there is no ground for believing 
that St Mark was thinking of leaving Rome in 61 a.D. and con- 
templating a possible visit to Colossae. He may therefore have 
remained in Rome and been St Peter’s companion there from 61 
to 64 4.D. On the other hand it suggests that St Mark’s visit 
to Rome had been carefully arranged for and undertaken with 
St Paul’s concurrence, if not at his request. 

Dr Chase (Hastings’ D. of B.) hazards a further conjecture 
that St Peter’s own visit to Rome was also at St Paul’s request. 
St Paul’s ardent desire was to unite Jewish and Gentile Christians 
in One Body, and if this could be accomplished in a mixed 
Church like that of Rome, the capital and meeting-place of the 
Empire, the problem would be largely solved for the rest of 
Christendom. This had been the great object of St Paul’s 
Epistle to the Romans. Its fulfilment would be enormously 
furthered if St Peter the Apostle to ‘‘those of the Circumcision” 
and Paul the Apostle of the Gentiles were seen working together 
in Rome. Such an object-lesson of unity would shew how com- 
pletely ‘‘the middle wall of partition” was broken down. In any 
case, whether it were at St Paul’s request or on his own initiative, 
St Peter would certainly welcome such an opportunity of again 
“giving the right hand of fellowship” to St Paul’s work. He 
had himself been chosen to “open the door” to Gentile converts. 
It was he who advocated their exemption from Circumcision and 
the observance of the Law. If on one occasion at Antioch he 
withdrew from intercourse with Gentiles it was obviously not 
from any personal bigotry of his own but merely out of deference 
to Jewish scruples. There is no evidence that he resented 
St Paul’s outspoken rebuke when once he realized that his conduct 
involved a breach of principle. Ὶ 

Although his own sphere of work had been speciaily among 
those of the Circumcision he must have been genuinely distressed 


DATE OF THE EPISTLE hi 


on finding himself claimed by Judaizers as a supposed opponent 
of St Paul. a 

There is therefore no reason to distrust the early tradition 
that St Peter and St Paul did “work together” and jointly 
founded the Church in Rome. If this was the case it can only 
have been just after St Paul’s release in 61 4.D., and the whole 
tenour of St Peter’s Epistle is easiest to explain if it was written 
during or just after such a period of fellowship with St Paul. 

With regard to St Peter’s other companion Silvanus (or Silas) 
we are told nothing of his movements after St Paul’s Second 
Missionary journey. Certainly Silvanus cannot have been in 
Rome before or during St Paul’s first imprisonment, otherwise 
so faithful a fellow-worker would inevitably have been mentioned 
in his Epistles. It is therefore quite possible that St Peter, 
St Mark and Silas might have been together in Rome at any 
time from 62 A.D. (or late in 61 A.D.) till the middle of 64 a.p. 
It is less easy to find an occasion when they might be there 
together later in Nero’s reign. 

If St Peter was in Rome during the first violence of the 
Neronian persecution he would almost certainly be one of the 
first victims. It is however possible that he may have returned 
to Jerusalem to take part in the election of Symeon as Bishop of 
Jerusalem after the death of James the Lord’s brother—which 
happened most probably in 62 4.D. Eusebius H. £. iii. 11 quotes 
a tradition that the surviving Apostles came together from all 
parts for the election of Symeon. 

It is true that Eusebius places this event after the Fall of 
Jerusalem in A.D. 70, but he was apparently misled by a rhetorical 
exaggeration of Hegesippus (Eus. ii. 23) who speaks of Vespasian 
commencing the siege immediately after the murder of James. 
But the account given by Josephus (Anz. xx. 9. 1), which is also 
quoted by Eusebius, would place the death of James in 62 A.D., 
and in this case the election of Symeon was presumably not long 
deferred. Some time however would necessarily elapse before 
the news of James’ death could reach Rome, and further delay 
would be necessary to summon a meeting of the scattered Apostles 
(say) in 63 or early in 64 a.p. If then St Peter did leave Rome 
before the persecution broke out he may have escaped martyrdom 
until nearly the end of Nero’s reign (or possibly even until a later 


ΠῚ INTRODUCTION 


date). On the other hand it seems inconceivable that either 
St Peter or Silvanus were in Rome when 2 Timothy was written 
shortly before St Paul’s martyrdom—and if St Peter had then 
been recently put to death St Paul would surely have referred to 
the fact. St Mark was certainly then somewhere in the East as 
St Paul asks Timothy to bring him with him to Rome (2 Tim. 
iv. 11). Itis certainly difficult to believe that St Paul was writing 
during the first fury of the Neronian persecution, but if he was 
writing in the autumn of 64 A.D. and St Mark did come to Rome 
“before winter” in answer to his request, then he may have 
remained in Rome after St Paul’s death as St Peter’s companion, 
and there would still remain some three years (65—68 A.D.) within 
the reign of Nero when 1 Peter might have been written. But 
if, as seems on the whole more probable, St Paul’s death is placed 
as late as 67 A.D. there would be hardly time for St Peter’s visit 
to Rome before Nero’s death. 


E. The Silence of the Epistle about St Paul. 


_ Arguments from silence are always precarious, but it is certainly 
difficult to believe that St Peter, if he wrote from Rome shortly 
after St Paul’s martyrdom, could have failed to mention it. Unless 
therefore we adopt Ramsay’s view that 1 Peter was written 
several years after St Paul’s death, and we set aside the tradition 
that St Peter himself was put to death in the reign of Nero, the 
absence of all mention of St Paul is more easily explained on the 
assumption that St Paul was still alive. In this case there are 
two. alternatives. (1) That St Paul was still in Rome but that 
his old colleague Silvanus, the bearer of this Epistle, was charged 
with all necessary tidings about him. Possibly, as Dr Chase 
suggests, Silvanus was being sent on a mission to Asia Minor 
on St Paul’s behalf. 

(2) That St Paul had already left Rome and had himself 
gone to Asia. He certainly contemplated such a journey soon 
after his release, as he asked Philemon to prepare him a lodging 
at Colossae (Philemon 22). In this case also Silvanus would 
perhaps be able to give tidings of St Paul to St Peter’s other 
readers. 

The various arguments as to the date of 1 Peter may therefore 
be summed up as follows: 


DATE OF THE EPISTLE liii 


(1) The traces of other Books point to a date not earlier than 
61 or 62 but not necessarily much later. 


(2) The spread of Christianity in the Northern provinces of 
Asia Minor is not impossible during the reign of Nero. 


(3) The relations between the Church and the State which 
are implied are not inconsistent with what is known of the 
Neronian persecution, and would even admit of a date shortly 
before that persecution broke out. 


(4) There is not sufficient evidence to set aside the tradition 
that St Peter suffered martyrdom in the reign of Nero, so that 
68 A.D. is the latest date consistent with the Petrine authorship 
of the Epistle. 


(5) That St Peter, St Mark and Silvanus might have been 
together in Rome between 61 and 64 or possibly, but less 
probably, at the end of Nero’s reign after St Paul’s death. 


(6) That the absence of all mention of St Paul is less difficult 
to explain before St Paul’s death than shortly after that event. 

Therefore the evidence seems to be slightly in favour of dating 
the Epistle between 62 and 64 a.D., and such a date would suit 
one of the apparent objects of the Epistle, namely to promote 
the union between Jewish and Gentile Christians. 


6. RELATIONS BETWEEN 1 PETER AND OTHER N.T. Books. 


(a) 1 Peter and James. 


1 Pet. 1. 1 ἐκλεκτοῖς παρεπιδήμοις διασπορᾶς. 
Jas 1.1 ταῖς δώδεκα φυλαῖς ταῖς ἐν τῇ διασπορᾷ. 
Three views are possible : 


(a) That both Epistles employ the word διασπορά in its 
literal sense of the Jewish Dispersion. In this case either writer 
might have used the phrase independently of the other. To 
St James writing from Jerusalem Jewish Christians in other 
lands would naturally be thought of as “in the Dispersion.” 
St Peter writing from the Roman centre of “the Dispersion” 
might quite naturally use the phrase of another district of the 
Dispersion. But if one writer did derive the word from the 
‘other the borrower was probably St Peter. 


liv - INTRODUCTION © 


(6) It may be déteral in St James and metaphorical in 
St Peter. In this case the natural inference would be that 
St Peter, with his mind evidently full of the thought of the 
Christian Church as the new Israel of God, borrowed St James’ 
greeting to the Dispersion and applied it to bis speccarton readers 
as the “new Dispersion.” 


(c) That both St James and St Peter use the word meta- 
_ phorically of the Christian Church. Certainly that suits the 
general tenour of St Peter’s Epistle, and Parry adduces strong 
arguments for its use in that sense by St James. 


If the report of St James’ speech (Acts xv. 14—20) may be 
accepted as representing his actual arguments, he did speak 
of God choosing a people (λαός) for His Name from among the 
Gentiles to be included in the restored “tabernacle of David”; 
and the language of the prophets about the ideal Jerusalem, 
coupled with our Lord’s words about “gathering together His 
elect,” might suggest to one writing from Jerusalem the idea 
of the Church as forming the Twelve Tribes of the ideal Israel 
of God at present “scattered abroad.” But if so it is a pregnant 
seed-thought suggesting the totality and the underlying unity 
of the Church despite present appearances. St James makes no 
attempt to expand it in the remainder of his Epistle, and, unless 
it was an idea already familiarized to the readers either by 
St James himself or other teachers, they would not readily grasp 
its meaning. 

In St Peter on the other hand the idea is elaborated and 
worked out by other titles—“holy nation,” “royal priesthood,” 
etc. 

It is however more likely that St Peter should have thus 
expanded a pregnant thought of St James’ than that St James 
should have chosen one single title out of St Peter’s list. 

It is almost impossible to date St Peter’s Epistle earlier than 
61 a.D.; if it was written from Rome, and if St James’ martyrdom 
was in 62 A.D. there would be barely time for St Peter’s Epistle 
to become known to him and still less to his readers. This 
argument affects also all the other passages under discussion in 
the two Epistles and suggests that St Peter borrowed from 
St James rather than vice versa. 


RELATIONS WITH OTHER N.T. BOOKS “ἵν 


1 Pet. i. 6f. ἐν ᾧ ἀγαλλιᾶσθε, ὀλίγον ἄρτι εἰ δέον λυπηθέντες ἐν 
ποικίλοις πειρασμοῖς, ἵνα τὸ δοκίμιον ὑμῶν τῆς πίστεως κιτ.λ. 

Jas i. 2f. πᾶσαν χαρὰν ἡγήσασθε ὅταν πειρασμοῖς περιπέσητε 
ποικίλοις, γινώσκοντες ὅτι τὸ δοκίμιον ὑμῶν τῆς πίστεως K.T.d. 

In these passages the verbal correspondence is so close and 
the order of the words in the last clause so unusual that there 
must be some direct literary connexion between the two writers. 

St Peter is referring to outward trials and persecutions, which 
form one of the main topics of his Epistle. He works out the 
idea of δοκίμιον by a comparison with the refining of gold, with 
an apparent allusion to Prov. xxvii. 21 δοκίμιον ἀργυρίῳ καὶ χρυσῷ 
πύρωσις (to which he reverts again in iv. 12) ἀνὴρ δὲ δοκιμάζεται 
διὰ στόματος ἐγκωμιαζόντων αὐτὸν and Prov. xvii. 3 δοκιμάζεται 
ἐν καμίνῳ ἄργυρος καὶ χρυσός, οὕτως ἐκλεκταὶ καρδίαι παρὰ 
Κυρίου. 

It may therefore be argued that St Peter borrowed a pregnant 
thought from St James and elaborated it from the Old Testament, 
at the same time softening down the uncompromising stoicism 
of St James πᾷσαν χαρὰν ἡγήσασθε by adding ὀλίγον ἄρτι, εἰ δέον, 
λυπηθέντες. Such expansion and mitigation of an allusive paradox 
might be natural on the part of the borrower while the reverse 
process would be less probable. 

On the other hand the ordinary view is that in St James also 
the words refer to external trials, which is not a prominent topic 
in his Epistle, and that he immediately deserts it to discuss 
temptations tosin. In this case the words are rather disconnected 
in St James and it might be argued that he borrowed them from 
St Peter as a kind of text. Parry however (St Jas. p. 32 ff.) argues 
that St James is throughout referring to temptations to sin and 
begins with the startling paradox “Count it all joy when ye fall 
into divers temptations.” 

In this case the words are connected with their context in 
St James, but it might be argued that such psychological 
analysis as St James bases on them is more subtle and therefore 
presumably later than the lessons of practical experience which 
St Peter gives. But, whereas the psychological phase would 
naturally be later than the practical in the same person, it is 
hardly a conclusive argument as to the relative dates of writings 
by two different persons, St Peter might have borrowed a subtle 


lvi INTRODUCTION 


idea from St James and either understood it or applied it in a 
more practical sense to outward trials. 

1 Pet. 1. 23 ff ἀναγεγεννημένοι...διὰ λόγου ζῶντος θεοῦ καὶ 
μένοντος... ἀποθέμενοι οὖν πᾶσαν κακίαν. 

Jas i. 18, 21 βουληθεὶς ἀπεκύησεν ἡμᾶς λόγῳ ἀληθείας... .διὸ 
ἀποθέμενοι...περισσείαν κακίας... δέξασθε τὸν ἔμφυτον λόγον. 

Here St James begins by referring to “the manifestation of 
God’s will in creation as a strong warrant and incentive for 
resistance to temptation” (Parry). In St Peter the only allusion 
to creation is in iv. 19, that God is “a faithful creator” who may 
be trusted in all trials not to neglect His own handiwork. 

St Peter on the other hand is referring to the word of 
regeneration by which man is begotten anew as a new creature. 

But St James goes on to urge his readers to receive the 
implanted word (λόγος ἔμφυτος), which seems to mean the fiat 
of creation after God’s likeness, as an active redemptive principle 
now implanted within the man who receives it, and this must 
be the word of regeneration, the new principle of life given in 
Christ Jesus. 

Both St Peter and St James shew that those who are thus 
begotten by the word of God must put away all malice. In 
St Peter this is urged as a necessary result of being so begotten. 
If the seed from which they spring is the incorruptible word of 
God which abides for ever, its fruit should be shewn in a love 
which is equally incorruptible and abiding, and this involves 
putting away all malice, etc. In St James the putting away of 
malice is rather a necessary preliminary in order to receive the 
implanted word. Thus the treatment of the subject is very 
different in the two writers. Whichever was the borrower has 
welded the idea into his own argument without any slavish 
imitation. But St James’s appeal to the fiat of creation is more 
subtle and obscure than the appeal to regeneration by St Peter. 
It would therefore seem that St Peter has adopted one part only 
of St James’ message, possibly not having himself grasped the 
allusion to the Gospel of Creation. ! 

The contrast between corruptible seed and the word of God 
living and abiding for ever is emphasized by St Peter by a 
quotation from Isaiah xl. 6 πᾶσα σὰρξ χόρτος καὶ πᾶσα δόξα 
ἀνθρώπου ὡς ἄνθος χόρτου, ἐξηράνθη ὁ χόρτος καὶ τὸ ἄνθος ἐξέπεσεν, 


RELATIONS WITH OTHER N.T. BOOKS vii 


τὸ δὲ ῥῆμα τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν μένει εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα. Ini. 24 he quotes 
the whole passage with three variations from the LXX. ὡς being 
inserted after σάρξ, αὐτῆς substituted for ἀνθρώπου and Κυρίου 
for τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν, all of which readings may possibly have been 
found in the text of the LXX. used by St Peter. Now the main 
point in St Peter’s use of the passage is the last clause, “the word 
of the Lord abideth for ever,” but the earlier portion is also very 
appropriate to his argument. The fading glory of grass is a 
fitting emblem of “the corruptible seed,” the vain manner of 
living which his readers had inherited from their heathen fore- 
fathers. Moreover the whole passage in Isaiah is a gospel of 
redemption and new birth for God’s exiled people in Babylon, 
based upon the lastingness of God’s promise as contrasted with 
the vanity of human schemes. It is therefore very suitable to 
describe the new birth of the New Israel, ransomed from their 
old heathen surroundings. 

St Peter therefore might quite well have selected the passage 
independently. But in view of the other traces of his indebted- 
ness to St James, it is not unlikely that the quotation was partly 
suggested to his mind by the fact that in Jas i. 10 a few phrases 
ὡς ἄνθος χόρτου...ἐξήρανε τὸν χόρτον καὶ τὸ ἄνθος αὐτοῦ ἐξέπεσε 
had been applied to the transitoriness of earthly riches. 

1 Pet. ii, 11 ἀπέχεσθαι τῶν σαρκικῶν ἐπιθυμιῶν αἵτινες 
στρατεύονται κατὰ τῆς Ψυχῆς. : 

Jas. iv. 1 ἐκ τῶν ἡδονῶν ὑμῶν τῶν στρατευομένων ἐν τοῖς 
μέλεσιν ὑμῶν; ἐπιθυμεῖτε. 

In St Peter the words are an injunction to Christians, ὃ as 
strangers and sojourners, to abstain from the mutinous desires 
of the flesh which are at war against their true self (ψυχή). 
They must maintain an honourable standard in all that dealings 
with heathen neighbours. 

In St James pleasures are regarded as hostile ΟΝ ΑΡΩ of 
the members, resisting a lawful authority which is not named, 
and this causes quarrels and fightings. There is therefore not 
any close connexion of thought between the two passages. 

Possibly St Peter may have had St Paul’s words in Rom. vii. 23 
in his mind. βλέπω ἕτερον νόμον ἐν τοῖς μέλεσίν pov ἀντιστρα- 
τευόμενον τῷ νόμῳ τοῦ νοός pov. The use οὗ σαρκικός in a bad 
sense is decidedly Pauline, but ψυχή must not be identified with 


I PETER é 


lviii ὃ INTRODUCTION — 


mvetpa—e.g. Gal. v. 17 ἡ yap σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ τοῦ mvevparos— 
ψυχή is the easatitial “self” in man, of which his bodily life is 
only a secondary element. 

1 Pet. iv. 8 ἀγάπη καλύπτει πλῆθος ἁμαρτιῶν. 

Jas v.20 one who converts a sinner καλύψει πλῆθος ἁμαρτιῶν. 

In Prov. x. 12 the LXX. reads μῖσος ἐγείρει νεῖκος πάντας δὲ τοὺς 
μὴ φιλονεικοῦντας. καλύπτει idia—but the Hebrew is “love 
covereth all sins.” 

It is possible that some Greek text of Proverbs.x. 12 may have 
read καλύπτει πλῆθος ἁμαρτιῶν ---οΟΥ ἀγάπη καλύπτει πλῆθος ἁμαρτιῶν 
may have been an unwritten saying of Christ, as Resch suggests— 
because it is introduced by φησί in Clem. Al. Paed. iii. 12 and by 
λέγει Κύριος in Didascalia ii. 3. But otherwise the words in 
Jas v. 20 can hardly be regarded as a quotation at all. In 
St Peter on the other hand there does seem to be an obvious 
reference to Proverbs x. 20, and, unless πλῆθος ἁμαρτιῶν occurred 
in the Greek text used by hind or in some familiar. saying, it 
seems probable that the variation from both the LXX. and the 
Hebrew was suggested by the phrase in St James. 

It is less easy to suppose that St Peter originated this variant 
form of an’O.T. proverb, and that St James borrowed part of it 
from him and used it in a sense which is very different from that 
in Proverbs and 1 Peter. i 

1 Pet. v. 5—9 ὁ θεὸς whee eo ἀντιτάσσεται ταπεινοῖς δὲ 
δίδωσιν χάριν. Ταπεινώθητε οὖν ὑπὸ τὴν κραταιὰν χεῖρα τοῦ θεοῦ, 
ἵνα ὑμᾶς ὑψόσυ». «ὁ διάβολος... ᾧ Beri orares 

Jas iv. 6 ὁ θεὸς uwepiponoy ἀντιτάσσεται ταπεινοῖς δὲ δίδωσιν 
χάριν. Ur oreyire οὖν τῷ θεῷ- ἀντίοτηνε δὲ τῷ διαβόλῳ...(10) 
ταπεινώθητε ἐνώπιον Ευῤίδο καὶ ὑψώσει ὑμᾶς. 

Here both writers quote the same verse, Prov. iii. 34, vedtly the 
same variation from the LXX. ὁ θεός for Κύριος. In St James the 
quotation is naturally suggested by the preceding words μείζονα 
δὲ δίδωσιν χάριν which Parry (St Jas. 40) explains to mean that 
God not only imparted a living soul to man in creation and 
therefore jealously demands its sole allegiance to Himself, but 
also bestows an even greater favour in the gift of regeneration— 
(cf. the λόγος ἀληθείας and the ἔμφυτος λύγος) This.gift can only 
be received with meekness and humility (cf. ἐν πραύτητι). Proud 
self-will,; which seeks its own pleasure. and ‘the friendship of the 


RELATIONS WITH OTHER N.T. BOOKS | lix 


world, inevitably means hostility to God—God “ranges Himself 
against” (ἀντιτάσσεται) the proud. Therefore “range yourselves 
under” (ὑποτάγητε) God—and thereby take your stand against 
the devil. The pleasures of sin can only end in wretchedness, 
whereas humble submission to God leads to true greatness. 

According to this interpretation the language about humility 
does form a natural part of the argument of St James and is not 
(as some have suggested) a rather disjointed digression based 
upon a quotation introduced merely to support δίδωσιν χάριν. 

In St Peter also the passage suits the context in which it 
occurs. He had just urged the “elders” not to “lord it over” 
the flock, and “the younger” on the other hand to “submit” to 
the elders. All parties must gird themselves with humility to 
serve each other, “for God resisteth the proud but gives favour 
to the humble.” Such “favour” is being conferred upon them 
even in their present sufferings. It is the God of all favour who 
is calling them to His eternal glory in Christ through suffering. 
But that favour can only be won by humble submission to God, 
coupled with stedfast resistance to the devil, who attempts to 
utilize such sufferings as an opportunity to “devour” his prey. 

Thus in St James the quotation from Proverbs was suggested 

by the words δίδωσιν χάριν, whereas St Peter borrows it to 
emphasize the need of humility. Then each writer turns to the 
other idea contained in the quotation. If this coincidence stood 
alone it might be argued that each quoted the same verse 
independently of the other (the common variant from the O.T. 
ὁ θεός for Κύριος being possibly found in their text of the LXX.). 
But, in view of the other coincidences between the two Epistles, 
it is more probable that St Peter has borrowed from St James, 
giving a more practical application to the somewhat subtle ideas 
suggested by him. 
_ Besides some coincidences in language, eg. mapaxiya. 
1 Pet. 1. 12, Jas 1. 25; καλὴ ἀναστροφή 1 Pet. ii, 12, Jas iii. 13; 
τὸν στέφανον τῆς δόξης 1 Pet. v. 4; τὸν στέφανον τῆς ζωῆς 
Jas i. 12, there are also coincidences of thought. 

Thus it has been suggested (Parry, St Jas. Ὁ. 69) that the 
striking phrase in Jas ii. 1 rod κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τῆς δόξης 
may-explain St Peter’s language about “glory.” The title “our 
glory” seems to be.applied to Christ in St James because in the 


e2 


Ix INTRODUCTION 


Person of Christ the divine ideal which manhood was destined 
to attain is revealed. So in 1 Pet. iv. 13, 14, those who are 
partakers of Christ’s sufferings will rejoice in the revelation of 
His glory. To be reproached in the name of Christ is a blessed 
thing because it means that the Spirit of God, the characteristic 
sign of that glory, the consummation of manhood in Christ, is 
already resting upon them. The same idea underlies vy. 1, 4, 10. 

But, although there is undoubted contact between the two 
Epistles and St Peter seems to have borrowed phrases, thoughts 
and arguments from St James, there is no servile adherence or 
imitation. St Peter and St James had for years been fellow- 
workers in Judaea, and all through his missionary work St Peter 
doubtless kept in touch with his old colleague at Jerusalem and 
would be acquainted with his Epistle almost as soon as it was 
written, and he re-echoes some of its thoughts and expressions in 
his own letter. But he alters and adapts them very freely, and 
the general tone and method of his letter is very different from 
that of St James. 


(δ) 1 Peter and Romans. 


1 Pet. i. 14. μὴ συνσχηματιζό- Rom. xii. 2. μὴ συνσχηματί- 
μενοι. ἕεσθε. 

This word occurs nowhere else in Biblical Greek. 

1 Pet. i. 17. τὸν ἀπροσωπο- Rom. ii. 6, 11. ὃς ἀποδώσει 
λήμπτως κρίνοντα κατὰ TO ἑκάστου ἑκάστῳ κατὰ τὰ ἔργα avrod...ob 
ἔργον. γάρ ἐστι προσωπολημψία παρὰ τῷ 

θεῷ. 


Here St Paul teaches that there will be no favouritism between 
Jews and Gentiles, a thought which St Peter expressed at his 
visit to Cornelius Acts x. 34. St Peter on the other hand shews 
that God’s children have no right to look for favouritism from 
Him as their Judge. 

1 Pet. i. 201. προεγνωσμένου Rom. xvi. 25 1. μυστηρίου χρό- 
μὲν πρὸ καταβολῆς κόσμον, φανερω- νοις αἰωνίοις σεσιγημένου φανερω- 
θέντος δὲ ἐπ᾽ ἐσχάτου τῶν χρόνων θέντος δὲ νῦν...εἰς ὑπακοὴν πίστεως 
δ ὑμᾶς (Gentiles) τοὺς δι’ αὐτοῦ εἰς πάντα τὰ ἔθνη. 
πιστούς. 

Here St Peter omits the characteristic Pauline word “mystery” 
but has the same idea of an eternal purpose of God for the 
inclusion of the Gentiles on terms of faith. 


RELATIONS WITH OTHER N.T. 


Ὁ Pet.: i. 21. 
πιστοὺς els θεὸν τὸν 
αὐτὸν ἐκ νεκρῶν. 


τοὺς δι᾽ αὐτοῦ 
ἐγείραντα-. 


BOOKS ἱχὶ 


Rom. iv. 24, τοῖς πιστεύουσιν 
4 an ν᾿ 
ἐπὶ τὸν ἐγείραντα Ἰησοῦν τὸν Κύριον 
ἡμῶν ἐκ νεκρῶν. ; 


Here St Peter’s phrase πιστοὺς εἰς θεόν is unique, and the 
language about the resurrection is an almost creed-like phrase 
which occurs frequently in St Peter’s speeches as well as in 


St Paul’s Epistles. 


1 Pet. i. 22. εἰς φιλαδελφίαν 
ἀνυπόκριτον. ii, 17. τὴν ἀδελ- 
φότητα ἀγαπᾶτε. 

1 Pet. 11, ὅ. ἀνενέγκαι πνευμα- 


Rom. xii. 9,10. ἡ ἀγαπὴ ἀνυ- 
πόκριτος. τῇ φιλαδελφίᾳ εἰς ἀλλή- 
λους φιλόστοργοι. 

Rom. xii. 1, παραστῆσαι τὰ 


σώματα ὑμῶν θυσίαν ζῶσαν ἁγίαν 
εὐάρεστον τῷ θεῷ, τὴν λογικὴν 
λατρείαν ὑμῶν. 

Here St Peter is describing the Christian Church, the New 
Israel of God as a holy priesthood, whereas in Romans St Paul 
describes himself as the sacrificing priest who presents the 
Gentiles as an offering to God, but he does also urge his readers 
to present themselves as a sacrifice—and contrasts their “reason- 
able” or spiritual sacrifice with that of dead animals, and St Peter 
has the same idea. 


1 Pet. ii. 6ff. ἰδοὺ τίθημι ἐν 


τικὰς θυσίας εὐπροσδέκτους θεῷ. 


Rom. ix. 88. ἰδοὺ τίθημι ἐν Σιὼν 


Σιὼν λίθον ἐκλεκτὸν ἀκρογωνιαῖον 
ἔντιμον, καὶ ὁ πιστεύων ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ οὐ 
μὴ καταισχυνθῇ...καὶ λίθος προσ- 


λίθον προσκόμματος καὶ πέτραν 
σκανδάλου καὶ ὁ πιστεύων ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ 
οὐ καταισχυνθήσεται. 


κόμματος καὶ πέτρα σκανδάλου, 
“ΤᾺ, 


Here we have a combination of two passages Isaiah xxviii. 16 
and viii. 14 (St Peter also introducing a third passage from Psalm 
cxvili, 22 about the stone which the builders rejected). Both 
have the same variations from the LXX. τίθημι ἐν Σιών instead 
of ἐμβάλλω εἰς τὰ θεμέλια Σιών and λίθος προσκόμματος καὶ πέτρα 
σκανδάλου instead of οὐχ ὡς λίθου προσκόμματι συναντήσεσθε οὐδὲ 
ὡς πέτρας πτώματι, Which is a loose paraphrase of the Hebrew 
and entirely inverts Isaiah’s meaning by inserting a negative. 
St Peter and St Paul give an accurate translation of the Hebrew 
but are hardly likely to have selected independently the same 
Greek words, which do not occur in any known version. It is 
however possible that they might have borrowed from a common 
source, either a Greek Bible the text of which differed from the 


Ixii - INTRODUCTION 

LXX., or from an early catena of Old Testament Messianic passages 
in which the passages about “the Stone” were grouped together. 
This however is pure conjecture, and in view of the other un- 
doubted coincidences between 1 Peter and Romans it is simpler 
to suppose that St Peter borrowed the composite quotation from 
St Paul, working it out in fuller detail and adding the verse from 
Ps. exvili. which our Lord had quoted of himself and St Peter 
had used in one of his speeches Acts iv. ll. | 

1 Pet. ii. 10. of ποτε οὐ λαὸς Rom, ix. 25. καλέσω τὸν οὐ 
νῦν δὲ λαὸς θεοῦ, of οὐκ HrAenuévor λαόν pov λαόν pov, καὶ τὴν οὐκ 
νῦν δὲ ἐλεηθέντες. ἠγαπημένην ἠγαπημένην. 

The passage is taken from Hosea ii. 23: St Peter agrees with 
the majority of MSS. of the LXX. which read ἠλεημένην instead 
of ἡγαπημένην which is found only in the Vatican MS. It might 
therefore be argued that St Peter is quoting independently from 
the LXX. But in Hosea the words refer to the restoration of 
renegade Israelites whereas St Paul applies them to the admission 
of the Gentiles, and it is in that sense that St Peter almost 
certainly employs the passage. 


1 Pet. ii. 13—17. ὑποτάγητε Rom. xiii. 1. πᾶσα ψυχὴ ἐξου- 


πάσῃ ἀνθρωπίνῃ κτίσει διὰ τὸν 
κύριον " εἴτε βασιλεῖ ὡς ὑπ ερέ- 
χοντι, εἴτε ἡγεμόσιν ὡς δι᾿ αὐτοῦ 
πεμπομένοις εἰς ἐκδίκησιν κακο- 
ποιῶν ἔπαινον δὲ ἀγαθοποιῶν" 
(ὅτι οὕτως ἐστὶν τὸ θέλημα τοῦ θεοῦ) 

πάντας τιμήσατε, τὴν ἀδελφότητα 
ἀγαπᾶτε, τὸν θεὸν φοβεῖσθε, τὸν 
βασιλέα τιμᾶτε. 


σίαις ὑπερεχούσαις ὑποτασσέ- 
σθω" οὐ γάρ « ἐστιν ἐξουσία εἰ μὴ ὑπὸ 
θεοῦ, αἱ δὲ οὖσαι ὑπὸ θεοῦ τεταγμέ- 
ναι εἰσίν. 

3. ol yap ἄρχοντες οὐκ εἰσὶν 
φόβος τῷ ἀγαθῷ ἔργῳ ἀλλὰ τῷ 
κακῷ. 

4. τὸ ἀγαθὸν ποίει καὶ ἕξεις 
ἔπαινον ἐξ αὐτῆς"... θεοῦ yap διά- 
κονός ἐστιν, ἔκδικος εἰς ὀργὴν τῷ 
τὸ κακὸν πράσσοντι. 

Ἵ. ἀπόδοτε πᾶσι τὰς ὀφειλάς, 
τῷ τὸν φόβον τὸν φόβον, τῷ τὴν 
τιμὴν τὴν τιμήν. 


In this passage we have not only a number of common words 
and phrases but the same ideas occur in the same order. 


1 Pet. ii. 24. ἵνα ταῖς ἁμαρτίαις 
ἀπογενόμενοι TH δικαιοσύνῃ ζήσω- 
μεν. 


Rom. vi. 11. οὕτως καὶ ὑμεῖς 
λογίζεσθε ἑαυτοὺς εἶναι νεκροὺς μὲν 
τῇ ἁμαρτίᾳ ζῶντας δὲ τῷ θεῷ ἐν 
Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ. 


In both passages the old life of sin is regarded as sh ideally 
terminated in the death of Christ. 


RELATIONS WITH OTHER N.T. BOOKS ixiii 


1 Pet. iii. 8 ἢ, ὁμόφρονες, συμ- Rom. xii. 14—19. εὐλογεῖτε, 
waGeis,...ramewdppoves, μὴ ἀποδι- τοὺς διώκοντας ὑμᾶς" εὐλογεῖτε Kal 


δόντες κακὸν ἀντὶ κακοῦ ἢ λοιδο- “μὴ καταρᾶσθε. χαίρειν μετὰ χαι- 
play ἀντὶ λοιδορίας τοὐναντίον δὲ ρόντων, κλαίειν μετὰ κλαιόντων. τὸ 
εὐλογοῦντες. αὐτὸ εἰς ἀλλήλους φρονοῦντες" μὴ τὰ 
ὑψηλὰ φρονοῦντες ἀλλὰ τοῖς ταπει- 
νοῖς συναπαγόμενοι.... μηδενὶ κακὸν 
: ἀντὶ κακοῦ ἀποδιδόντες. ᾿ 
1 Pet. iii. 18. Χριστὸς ἅπαξ Rom. vi. 10. ὃ γὰρ ἀπέθανε τῇ 
περὶ ἁμαρτιῶν [ἀπέθανεν]....θανα- ἁμαρτίᾳ ἀπέθανεν ἐφάπαξ, ὃ δὲ ζῇ 
τωθεὶς μὲν σαρκὶ ζωοποιηθεὶς δὲ ζῇ τῷ θεῷ. 
πνεύματι. : 


Here the emphatic words ἅπαξ and. ἐφάπαξ are used to shew 
that Christ’s death was the termination of the regime of sin once 
and for all, and the ushering i in of a life of spiritual activity. 

This, says St Paul, is the ideal for those who claim to share 
Christ’s death in Baptism. 

This, says St ‘Peter, is the blessed purpose of sufferings in the 
flesh, whereby Chiistians are sharing in the sufferings which 
cutaalnatiod in-death for Christ. 


.. 1 Pet. iii. 21. ὑμᾶς. . σώζει βάπ- Rom. vi. 4 (cf. Col. ii, 12). 
τισμα.. συνειδήσεως ἀγαθῆς éwepw- συνετάφημεν οὖν αὐτῷ διὰ τοῦ βατ- 
τημα εἰς θεόν, δι᾿ ἀναστάσεως Ἰησοῦ τίσματος εἰς τὸν θάνατον, ἵνα ὥσπερ 
Χριστοῦ. ἠγέρθη Χριστὸς ἐκ νεκρῶν... οὕτως 
καὶ ἡμεῖς ἐν καινότητι ζωῆς περιπα- 
τήσωμεν. ᾿ 


St Paul shews that in Baptism we represent the burial of our 
old sinful self and the rising again of the new self. We-claim to 
share in the death and resurrection of Christ. So St Peter shews 
that life comes out of death. In the sufferings of Christ the death 
of His Flesh terminated the regime of sin and set His Spirit free 
for new life. In the Flood the same water which drowned the 
guilty world was the medium by which Noah and his family 
were preserved for ἃ kind of resurrection life. So in Baptism 
there is a death unto sin and a new birth or resurrection to 
righteousness in virtue of the resurrection of Christ.- τὺ 


1 Pet. iv. 1. ὁ παθὼν σαρκὶ Rom. vi. 7. ὁ yap ἀποθανὼν 
πέπαυται ἁμαρτίαις. - ᾿ δεδικαίωται ἀπὸ τῆς ἁμαρτίας. 

St Paul is arguing that death cancels all previous obligations. 
A:slave can no longer be brought. into court by his previous owner. 
The master must lose his case and the slave be acquitted if his 


lxiv INTRODUCTION 

death certificate can be produced. So those who claim to have 
died with Christ in baptism are exempt from the claims of their 
old master Sin. Their duty now is to share the resurrection 
life of Christ. 

St Peter is continuing his argument about suffering in the flesh. 
He has shewn that Christ’s sufferings and death were the ter- 
mination of the regime of sin once and for all—and that in 
Baptism we claim to have risen with Christ from a similar death 
to sin. Sufferings in the flesh therefore should be welcomed as 
a means by which that ideal death unto sin may be made a 
greater reality and help us to live unto God in the spirit. 

The language and the illustrations used by St Peter are very 
different from those employed by St Paul—but the ideas are 
intensely Pauline. 


- 1 Pet. iv. 8. ἐν ἀσελγεέαις-... 
οἰνοφλυγίαις, κώμοις, πότοις. 

1 Pet. iv. 9—11. φιλόξενοι εἰς 
ἀλλήλους.. ἕκαστος καθὼς ἔλαβεν 
χάρισμα, εἰς ἑαυτοὺς αὐτὸ διακο- 
νοῦντες ὡς καλοὶ οἰκονόμοι ποικίλης 
χάριτος θεοῦ" εἴ τις λαλεῖ, ὡς λόγια 
θεοῦ" εἴ τις διακονεῖ, ὡς ἐξ ἰσχύος 
ἧς χορηγεῖ ὁ θεός. 


Rom, xiii. 18, μὴ κώμοις καὶ 
μέθαις, μὴ κοίταις καὶ ἀσελγείαις. 

Rom. xii. 3—13. ἑκάστῳ ws 6 
θεὸς ἐμέρισε μέτρον πίστεως... ἔχον- 
τες δὲ χαρίσματα κατὰ τὴν χάριν 
τὴν δοθεῖσαν ἡμῖν διάφορα, εἴτε προ- 
φητείαν... εἴτε διακονίαν... .τὴν φιλο- 
ξενίαν διώκοντες. 


Here we have similar language about the diligent use of diverse 
gifts—but St Paul employs his favourite illustration of the Body 
and its members, each with its own function to discharge for the 
good of the whole, while St Peter uses the illustration of stewards 


entrusted with their Master’s goods. 


1 Pet iv. 18, καθὸ κοινωνεῖτε 
τοῖς τοῦ Χριστοῦ παθήμασιν χαίρετε 
ἵνα καὶ ἐν τῇ ἀποκαλύψει τῆς δόξης 
αὐτοῦ χαρῆτε ἀγαλλιώμενοι. 

1 Pet. v. 1. μάρτυς τῶν τοῦ 
Χριστοῦ παθημάτων, ὁ καὶ τῆς μελ- 
λούσης ἀποκαλύπτεσθαι δόξης κοι- 
νωνός. ; ᾿ 


ΒΟ. viii. 17. εἴπερ συμπάσ- 
χομεν ἵνα καὶ συνδοξασθῶμεν. 


Rom. viii. 18, λογίζομαι γὰρ 
ὅτι οὐκ ἄξια τὰ παθήματα τοῦ νῦν 
καιροῦ πρὸς τὴν μέλλουσαν δόξαν 
ἀποκαλυφθῆναι εἰς ἡμᾶς. 


(6) 1 Peter and Ephesians. 


. Most commentators recognize some connexion between the two 
Epistles, and Seufert actually attributed them to the same author. 
Weiss and Kiihl assign the priority to 1 Peter, but the general 


RELATIONS WITH OTHER N.T. BOOKS \xv 


view is that St Peter was influenced by St Paul’s Epistle. Abbott 
(Intr. p. xxiv) says that “the parallelisms between these two 
Epistles are so numerous that the Epistles may almost be 
compared throughout.” Dr Hort (/nér. p. 5) says that “the 
connexion, though very close, does not lie on the surface. It is 
shewn more by identities of thought and similarity of structure 
between the two Epistles as wholes than by identities of 
phrase.” 

Again (Prolegomena to phestvos, p- 169) he says “The truth 
is that in the First Epistle of St Peter many thoughts are derived 
from the Epistle to the Ephesians, as others are from that to the 
Romans, but St Peter makes them fully his own by the form into 
which he casts them, a form for the most part unlike what we 
find in any Epistle of St Paul’s.” 

The connexion between the two Epistles might plausibly be 
accounted for by the suggestion that St Peter had come to Rome 
towards the end of St Paul’s first imprisonment there or just 
after his release. The object of his visit was not improbably to 
support St Paul’s great work of binding together Jews and 
Gentiles in one Body. Either from St Paul himself or from 
St Mark, who had been St Paul’s companion when Ephesians 
was written, St Peter learns the inspiring thoughts which 
St Paul had addressed to the Churches of Asia in that Epistle, 
and without any slavish imitation he himself echoes some of the 
same ideas in his own letter, welcoming the Gentiles as members 
of the New Israel of God. Among such echoes of St Paul’s 
thought or language the following passages may be noted. 

In 1 Pet. i. 3 we have the same benediction εὐλογητὸς ὁ θεὸς 
καὶ πατὴρ τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ, cf. Eph. i. 3. This 
occurs also in 2 Cor. i. 3 and in itself might possibly be a mere 
coincidence, as such benedictions were a common formula in the 
letters of devout Jews. But the whole substance of 1 Pet. i. 3—5 
corresponds with Eph. i. 18—20, with the same emphasis upon 
the Christian’s “hope” and “inheritance” grounded upon the 
“resurrection of Christ.” 

In 1 Pet. i. 7 the proved genuineness of Christian faith resulting 
eis ἔπαινον καὶ δόξαν may be compared with εἰς ἔπαινον δόξης 

“τῆς χάριτος αὐτοῦ Eph. i. 6 and εἰς ἔπαινον δόξης αὐτοῦ i. 12, 14. 

In 1 Pet. i. 10—12 the thought that the admission of the 


Ixvi INTRODUCTION 


Gentiles was not understood in former times but is now revealed 
by the Spirit is very similar to that in Eph. iii. 5, but St Peter 
adds that the prophets themselves had a revelation that their 
message was not for themselves. 

The thought in 1 Pet. i. 12 that the extension of God’s favour 
to the Gentiles is watched by angels with wondering eyes, as 
opening up a fresh vista of God’s all-embracing love, has no 
parallel in the N.T. except in Eph. iii. 10, where the manifold 
wisdom of God is described as being made known to heavenly 
powers by means of the Church. But the actual phrase παρα- 
κύψαι as applied to angels in St Peter may have been borrowed 
from the Book of Henoch ix. 1. 

The description of heathenism as a condition of walking in 
vanity, ματαίας ἀναστροφῆς 1 Pet. i. 18, and ignorance, ἄγνοια i. 14, 
may be compared with Eph. iv. 17, 18. For the call from dark- 
ness to light ii. 9, cf. Eph. v. 8. 

The idea that redemption through Christ was foreordained 
before the foundation of the world but is only now manifested 
1 Pet. i. 20 is expressed in varying language in Eph. i. 4 ἐξελέξατο 
ἡμᾶς ἐν αὐτῷ πρὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου i. 8, 11, ii. 10, iii. 11. 

The designation of Christians as τέκνα ὑπακοῆς and therefore 
bound to abandon the fashion of their former lusts in the days 
of their ignorance and model their lives after God (κατά) 
1 Pet. i. 14, 15 is the antithesis to the description in Eph. ii. 1—3 
of the viol τῆς ἀπειθείας, τέκνα ὀργῆς walking in lusts κατὰ τὸν 
ἄρχοντα τῆς ἐξουσίας τοῦ ἀέρος. 

The description of Christians as being built into a spiritual 
temple (οἶκος), followed by the quotation from Isaiah describing 
Christ as the ἀκρογωνιαῖον 1 Pet. i, ὅ ἢ, may be compared with 
Eph. ii. 20, where Gentiles are described as. being built upon the 
foundation of the Apostles and prophets into a holy temple 
(ναός) Jesus Christ Himself being the ἀκρογωνιαῖον. 

The exhortations to servants and wives to shew due subjection 
for the Lord’s sake, recognizing earthly relationships as institu- 
tions of God to be respected διὰ συνείδησιν θεοῦ in all fear, 
1 Pet. 11. 13—25, is less mystical than St Paul’s description of 
marriage as an earthly picture of the union between Christ and 
the Church, Eph. v. 22—23, but not dissimilar. 

The injunction to be εὔσπλαγχνοι, refraining the tongue from 


RELATIONS WITH OTHER N.T. BOOKS \xvii. 


evil 1 Pet. iii. 8—10, is not unlike that in Eph. iv. 31—32, the 
word εὔσπλαγχνος being found nowhere else in the N.T. 

The thought that one great purpose of Christ’s death was to 
present the Gentiles to God ἵνα ὑμᾶς (v. 1.) προσαγάγῃ 1 Pet. iii. 18 
may be compared with Eph. ii. 18, that it is by the Cross that 
both Jews and Gentiles have access (προσαγωγή) to the Father. 

The language about the Ascension of Christ 1 Pet. iii. 21—22 
δι ἀναστάσεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ὅς ἐστιν ἐν δεξιᾷ θεοῦ πορευθεὶς 
εἰς οὐρανὸν ὑποταγέντων αὐτῷ ἀγγέλων καὶ ἐξουσιῶν καὶ δυνάμεων 
may possibly be based upon some wei creed-like formula, but it 
certainly resembles Eph. i, 20 é ἐγείρας αὐτὸν ἐκ. βεύρθν καὶ καθίσας 
ἐν δεξιᾷ αὐτοῦ ἐν τοῖς ἐπουρανίοιέ ὑπεράνω πάσης ἀρχῆς καὶ ἐξουσίας 
καὶ δυνάμεως καὶ κυριότητος. 

The following arguments a priori suggest the probability that 
St Peter made use of St Paul’s Epistles to the Romans and 
Ephesians. 


(1) St Paul was a man of ‘adi higher education and a far 
more prolific writer than St Peter. Therefore it is less likely 
that he borrowed from St Peter than vice versa. 


(2) St Peter’s Epistle seems to have been written from Rome, 
and it is difficult to believe that he had worked in Rome before 
the Epistles to the Romans and Ephesians were written. 


_ (3) On the other hand both of. those Epistles would almost 
certainly be brought to St Peter’s notice when he did visit Rome, 
if not earlier. One of them was addressed to Rome and would 
be well known there. The other was written from Rome, probably 
in the presence of St Peter's companion St Mark (cf. Col. iv. 10), 
and was addressed to the Churches of Asia; who formed an 
important section of St Peter’s. readers. 

(4) Romans was written about 57.a.p. at Corinth in the midst 
of active mission work. Ephesians about 61 Α.Ὁ. in a prison 
lodging at Rome. It is therefore. less likely that St Paul on two 
occasions, separated by four or five years, at places widely distant 
from each other, would quote from St Peter’s Epistle than that 
St Peter on one occasion writing from Rome should quote from 
two Epistles of St Paul. 


ον Internal evidence is not. conclusive and Ainindbhaniiy opposite 
views have been taken. Many critics, including Lightfoot, Hort, 


Ixviii INTRODUCTION 


Sanday and Headlam, regard St Peter as having borrowed from 
St Paul. On the other hand the elder and younger Weiss and 
Kiihl assign the priority to St Peter. Bigg (St Peter, 15 ff.), while 
admitting that St Peter must have read St Paul’s Epistles and 
that his amanuensis may have often heard St Paul preach, denies 
any direct borrowing on St Peter’s part from Romans or Ephesians. 
He argues that St Peter shews no trace of the fundamental topics 
dealt with in Romans, nor of the characteristic Pauline figure of 
the “one body.” Romans and 1 Peter, he says, have a few not 
very remarkable phrases and a couple of obvious, practical topics 
in common but are otherwise as different as possible. The 
common composite quotation from Isaiah, with the same 
divergence from the LXX., may possibly be explained by the 
theory that they both borrowed from a common source, possibly 
an early collection of Messianic prophecies. 

Sanday and Headlam (Rom. Ixxv f.) on the other hand say 
“the resemblance (between 1 Peter and Romans) is too great 
and too constant to be accidental.” Besides the common com- 
posite quotation (possibly derived from a common source) not 
only do we find the same thoughts, such as the metaphorical use 
of the idea of sacrifice (Rom. xii. 1; 1 Pet. ii. 5), and the same 
rare words, such as συνσχηματίζεσθαι, ἀνυπόκριτος, but in one 
passage (Rom. xiii. 1—7; 1 Pet. ii. 13—17) we have, what must 
be regarded as conclusive evidence, the same ideas occurring in 
the same order. Nor can there be any doubt that of the two 
the Epistle to the Romans is the earlier. St Paul works out a 
thesis logically and clearly. St Peter gives a series of maxims 
for which he is largely indebted to St Paul. For example, in 
Romans xiii. 1—7 we have a broad general principle laid down. 
St Peter, clearly influenced by the phraseology of that passage, 
merely gives three rules of conduct. 

In St Paul the language and ideas come out of the sequence 
of thought; in St Peter they are adopted because they had 
already been used for the same purpose. 


(α) 1 Peter and Hebrews. 


There are certainly some resemblances between the two Epistles. 
Both are addressed to Churches which were in danger of per- 
secution. Therefore in both suffering is regarded as a loving 


RELATIONS WITH OTHER N.T. BOOKS \xix 


discipline, in Hebrews as a fatherly chastisement of beloved sons, 
in 1 Peter as a crucible to test-the purity of their faith. 

Both contain warnings against apostasy and resentment under 
injury. 

Both appeal to the example of Christ, exalted through suffering, 
as the model of patient endurance—suffering being a prelude to 
glory—-1 Pet. i. 11, iv. 13, v. 10; Heb. ii. 10, xii. 1—3. 

Again both Epistles regard Christianity as the natural outcome 
of Judaism, and shew that Christians have a spiritual priesthood, 
1 Pet. ii. 5; Heb. x. 19—22. But the writer to the Hebrews, 
addressing Jewish readers who hankered after the old regime, 
shews the imperfections of the old sacrificial system as being 
merely the shadow of which Christianity is the reality. St Peter 
on the other hand, writing chiefly for Gentile readers, claims for 
them all the old titles and privileges of Israel. 

Both writers lay stress upon the moral effects of the death of 
Christ as the termination of the regime of sin—once and for all 
ἅπαξ, 1 Pet. iii. 18; Heb. ix. 26, and use the same sacrificial 
language, not found elsewhere of Christ, offering up our sins, 
ἀναφέρειν ἁμαρτίας 1 Pet. ii. 24; Heb. ix. 28. The duty of 
Christians therefore is to have done with sin. But this idea 
is more probably derived by St Peter from Romans. 

But, with the exception of the word ἀντίτυπον 1 Pet. iii. 21; 
Heb. ix. 24, the verbal coincidences between the two Epistles can 
nearly all be accounted for from the Old Testament. 

It is therefore probable that both writers drew from the 
common store of ideas and phrases that belonged to Judaistic 
Christianity, and both represent the liberal school of Jewish 
Christians who recognized that old things had passed away and 
become new in Christ. 


7. THE READERS OF THE EPISTLE, 


A. Their home. The Epistle is addressed to the Christians 
scattered throughout the Roman provinces which constituted 
the region now called Asia Minor, with the exception of the 
coast-land south of the Taurus mountains. The history of each 
_ province and the probable means by which Christianity was 
introduced into it are discussed in the notes on i. 1, The 


Ixx INTRODUCTION 


district is certainly a wide one but great facilities for travel were 
provided by the Roman Empire. Apparently Silvanus was pro- 
posing to make a circular tour starting from some seaport in 
Pontus and ending his journey somewhere on the coast of 
Bithynia. Such a tour to visit the chief centres of Christianity 
in a vast district is ὌΝ what we find in St Paul’s missionary 
journeys. 

B. Their νι δα: Were they Jewish or Gentile Christians ? 
Most of the Greek Fathers, e.g. Origen (Eus. H. £. iii. 1), Didymus 
and Eusebius (iii. 4), seem to have held the view that St Peter’s 
readers were Jews by birth. This opinion was shared by many 
commentators after the Reformation, such as Erasmus, Calvin, 
Grotius and Bengel, and it is supported by some recent critics in- 
cluding B. Weiss and Kiihl. On the other hand the Latin Fathers 
Augustine and Jerome held that it was addressed to Gentile 
converts (though in one passage, Viri Jilust. 1, Jerome repeats 
Origen’s statement that St Peter preached to those of the Cir- 
cumcision in the dispersion). Most modern critics of all schools 
support the view that the Epistle was chiefly addressed to Gentiles, 
although no doubt there were numerous Jewish Christians among 
them. 

The anputneins in favour of the view that the readers were 
Jewish Christians are as follows: 


(1) That the special sphere of work assigned to St Peter 
was among “those of the Circumcision” (Gal. 11. 8—9). In 
answer to this it may be said that the arrangement was not 
absolute and in no way precluded St Peter from addressing 
Gentile Christians, just as St Paul, although especially the 
Apostle of the Gentiles, constantly worked among Jews, always 
offering the Gospel “to the Jew first,” and addressing them by 
name in parts of the Epistle to the Romans. 

(2) That the Epistle is expressly addressed to “the sojourners 
of the dispersion,” παρεπιδήμοις διασπορᾶς, which, it is argued, 
most naturally refers to the Jewish dispersion, But reasons are 
given (p. liiif{ and note ad loc.) for explaining διασπορά in a 
metaphorical sense. 

(3) That the constant direct or indirect allusions to the Old 
‘Testament imply a degree of familiarity. with the O.T., on the 


READERS OF THE EPISTLE Ixxi 


part of the readers which would be hardly possible for Gentile 
converts from heathenism. In answer to this it may be urged 
that the O.T. was “the Bible” of the Apostolic Church whether 
Jew or Gentile. 

(4) That several passages in the Epistle would most rintiteniist 
refer to Jews, e.g. the words of Hosea, quoted in ii. 10 “which 
in time past were no people but are now the people of God,” 
were originally spoken to Israelites. But in Romans St Paul 
applies them to the admission of the Gentiles, and they are much 
more forcible if addressed to Gentiles in 1 Peter. _ 

Again in ii. 25 the readers are described as having strayed 
away but having now returned to the Shepherd. This, it is 
urged, could only properly be said of Jews, because they alone 
had been previously under-the Shepherd. But by creation and 
by God’s design all men are “the sheep of His pasture”—whether 
they belonged to the Jewish “fold” or not. 

Again in iii. 6 the women are described as having become the 
daughters of Sarah by well-doing. Here it is urged that the 
word “become” cannot be emphasized as pointing to the ad- 
mission of Gentiles to God’s family, because Gentile women 
would have “become” daughters of Sarah by their conversion 
and not by their subsequent conduct. But very possibly the 
words about Sarah ἧς ἐγενήθητε τέκνα are a parenthesis, and the 
words which follow about well-doing etc. may refer to the conduct 
of the holy women of old. Also ἐγενήθητε may be better rendered 
“whose daughters you proved yourselves to be.” This would 
have additional force if addressed to Gentiles as being included 
in the seed of Abraham in Christ, cf. Rom. iv. 16; Gal. iv. 21—381. 

None of the above arguments therefore necessitate the view 
that the readers were Jewish Christians. On the other hand 
there are several passages in the Epistle which almost certainly 
refer to Gentiles. 

(a) Ini. 14 the readers are bidden not to “fashion themselves 
according to their former lusts in the days of their ignorance.” 
It is true that ignorance (ἄγνοια) is once used by St Peter of the 
conduct of Jews in crucifying Christ (Acts iii. 17), and St Paul 
uses the verb ἀγνοεῖν of his own conduct in persecuting the 
Christians (1 Tim. i. 13), but elsewhere, Acts xvii. 30; Eph. iv. 18, 
᾿ἄγνοια is. specially used of heathenism. . 


xxii INTRODUCTION 


(6) Ini. 18 they are described as having been redeemed from 
their vain (ματαίας) manner of life handed down by their fathers 
(warporapadérov). The last word taken by itself might seem to 
suggest Jewish traditions, but heathenism had equally strong 
hereditary claims upon its followers, and the phrase “ vain things” 
was constantly used of idolatry in the LXX. and also in Acts xiv. 
15; Eph. iv. 17 (ματαιότης). 

(c) In ii. 9 they are described as having been “called out of 
darkness into God’s marvellous light.” Similar language is used 
of St Paul’s mission to the Gentiles (Acts xxvi. 18 quoting 
Isaiah xlii. 7, 16) and “darkness” is specially used of heathenism 
in Rom. i. 21; Eph. iv. 18, v. 8, but in Col. i. 13 St Paul regards 
all Christians (ἡμᾶς) as rescued out of the power of darkness. 


(d) In iv. 2—4 they are no longer to live the remainder of 
their life in the flesh according to the lusts of men, but according 
to the will of God. For the time past of their lives is sufficient 
for them to have wrought the will of the Gentiles, walking (as 
they have done) in wantonness and unlawful idolatries. Yet the — 
Gentiles think it strange that they do not join them in their 
profligate excesses. If this language was addressed to Jewish 
Christians it would imply that the Jews of the Dispersion had 
generally lapsed into heathenism and immorality, whereas there 
is no evidence for such wholesale apostasy. Again it would hardly 
have been a surprise to their neighbours if Jewish settlers had 
a different standard of religion and morality. But Gentile con- 
verts would doubtless be regarded as fanatics if they abandoned 
the habitual practices of their own relations and friends. 


(e) There are several passages in the Epistle in which 
St Peter emphasizes the idea that God’s mercies, long reserved 
and foretold, have at last been extended to his readers (εἰς ὑμᾶς). 

After coupling himself with his readers in i. 3 “God hath 
begotten us (ἡμᾶς) again,” in the next verse he speaks of the 
inheritance as having been all along kept in reserve (τετηρημένην) 
to be extended to them (εἰς ὑμᾶς). The concluding words of 
verse 5 ἑτοίμην ἀποκαλυφθῆναι ἐν καιρῷ ἐσχάτῳ may also (as 
Dr Chase suggests Hastings’ D. of B. iii. 795) refer to the in- 
heritance and not to the immediately preceding substantive 
σωτηρίαν. In this case the meaning may be that the inheritance 


READERS OF THE EPISTLE xxiii 


was kept in reserve ready to be revealed when “the fulness of 
the time” was come in the Messianic age of the Christian dis- 
pensation, cf. i. 20 φανερωθέντος δὲ ἐπ᾽ ἐσχάτου τῶν χρόνων bv 
ὑμᾶς, οἵ, also Romans xvi. 25—26 and Eph. iii. 5, where the 
admission of the Gentiles as fellow-heirs (συγκληρονόμα) is 
described as being now revealed (ἀπεκαλύφθη). 

In i. 10—12 St Peter says that the prophets who prophesied 
of the favour of God destined to be extended to you (τῆς eis ὑμᾶς 
χάριτος) learned by revelation that it was not for themselves 
but for you (ὑμῖν, so W.H. not ἡμῖν as T.R.) that they were 
ministering. 

In 1. 25, after quoting the message of good tidings originally 
addressed to the Jews in Babylon that “the word of the Lord 
endureth for ever,” he says this is the word which has been 
preached as good tidings reaching to you (εἰς ὑμᾶς). 

In ii, 4 the readers are described as “coming” (προσερχόμενοι) 
to the living stone that even they (καὶ αὐτοί) may be built into a 
spiritual Temple, because faith is the one requisite for sharing 
the preciousness of the stone laid in Zion ; therefore it belongs to 
you (ὑμῖν). You who were previously not a people are now the 
people of God ; and all the old titles of honour addressed to God’s 
chosen people Israel are now true of you (ὑμεῖς), cf. Ephesians ii. 
20—22 where Jews and Gentiles are built into one Temple united 
by one corner stone (ἀκρογωνιαῖον). 

In iii. 18 the best text is ὑμᾶς, and the meaning seems to be 
that it was only by His death that Christ. was able to win access 
(προσαγάγῃ) to God for Gentiles (cf. Eph. ii. 18 rpocaywyn). 

In i, 12 the extension of God’s favours to you (Gentiles) opens 
up a fresh vista to the angelic students of God’s mysterious 
purpose for the world, ef. Eph. iii. 10. 3 

If then we regard the Epistle as addressed primarily to Jewish 
Christians much of its meaning is lost. There were doubtless 
numerous Jewish settlers in the provinces of Asia Minor, but 
the bulk of the inhabitants, and therefore presumably of .the 
Christians, were Gentiles, and it is to them that the Epistle is 
primarily addressed. One great object of St Peter is to assert 
the truth which he had championed at the Apostolic conference 
(Acts xy. 14), that God had “visited the Gentiles to bake out of 
them a people for his name.” ᾿ 


I PETER τῇ 


lxxiv INTRODUCTION 


C. The circumstances of the readers. We have no certain 
evidence as to when and by whom they had been converted. 
St Peter makes no claim that he had himself worked among 
them, and the statement of Origen (Eus. H. £. iii. 1) to that 
effect is probably based only upon the salutation of this Epistle. 

In i, 12 St Peter merely refers to “those who preached the 
Gospel to you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven.” 
Some of them doubtless were converts of Paul and Barnabas on 
the first missionary journey, others of Paul, Silas and Timothy 
on the second journey, others may have been converted by 
Epaphras, or Aquila and Priscilla. Again the description of 
Silvanus in v. 12 “as a faithful brother to you” very probably 
may refer to his previous work in the provinces addressed. 

In ii. 2 they are described as “new-born babes,” but this does 
not necessarily imply that they were very recent converts. The 
phrase denotes rather the simple childlike tastes which even the 
maturest Christian should retain (cf. 1 Cor. xiv. 20 “in malice 
be ye babes”). St Peter assumes that there were presbyters in 
some at any rate of the Christian communities which he addresses, 
and such presbyters are exposed to the temptations of “lording 
it over the flock” (v. 3) or of seeking office for the sake of sordid 
gain, neither of which would be probable dangers in an infant 
church, even if the latter warning refers to the management of 
Church funds rather than to official stipend. The Christians 
are already a marked body among their heathen neighbours. 
Their lives have a conspicuous influence upon the world around. 
They are exposed to constant obloquy, insults, injustice, even 
bodily violence for the sake of their religion. The advice to 
servants, without any corresponding instruction to Christian 
masters such as we find in Ephesians and Colossians, may 
suggest that most of the Christians were of humble rank, but 
this argument from silence must not be overpressed, as the 
passage is dealing with submission and patience under unjust 
treatment, and it would have involved a slight digression to 
teach masters their duty towards their servants. 

There is no reference to any controversial questions about 
Circumcision or clean and unclean meats, such as we find in 
St Paul’s earlier Epistles. But even in Ephesians and Colossians 
these do not seem to have been such burning questions as had 


READERS OF THE EPISTLE lxxv 


been the case a few years earlier. Possibly Jewish influence was 
not so strong in the northern provinces. At any rate St Peter, 
in welcoming the Gentiles as included in the New “ Israel of God,” 
abstains from referring to minor questions of ritual and deals 
only with general principles of Christian conduct. 

Moreover the perils, to which Christians were now exposed, 
were not so much from the Jews or from false brethren as 
“perils among the heathen.” 


8. THE OCCASION AND PURPOSE OF THE EPISTLE. 


The order in which the provinces are named in i. 1, coupled 
with the fact that Pontus and Bithynia, which formed one 
Roman province, are mentioned separately, one at the beginning 
and the other at the end of the list, probably indicates the route 
which Silvanus, the bearer of the Epistle, proposed to follow. 
It would seem that he intended to land at one of the seaports 
in Pontus, possibly Sinope, and travel south through Galatia 
and Cappadocia and then eastwards, again passing through part 
of Galatia to Asia and thence northwards, regaining the shore of 
the Black Sea somewhere in Bithynia. Such a route implies an 
extensive and organized missionary journey, and it may be con- 
jectured that Silvanus was either intending to revisit districts 
where he had already been working (cf. v. 12) or, as Dr Chase 
suggests (Hastings’ D. of B. iii. 791), he may have been under- 
taking the journey as St Paul’s messenger. At any rate St Peter 
avails himself of the opportunity afforded by this proposed journey 
of Silvanus to send a letter to the scattered Christians of that 
vast district. No doubt there were many Jewish Christians 
among them but the majority were Gentiles, and it is to them 
that St Peter chiefly addresses himself. One of the chief objects 
of St Peter’s visit to Rome was probably to promote union 
between Jews and Gentiles in the Church. That object, as we 
know from Acts, was no less dear to Silvanus. It would there- 
fore be a real strength to him in his mission to the provinces of 
Asia Minor to have such a letter as this, written by the recog- 
nized leader of the Jewish Christians, welcoming the Gentiles as 
members of the New Israel of God. 

Moreover it was a time of threatened danger and rising 


f2 


Ixxvi INTRODUCTION 


persecution, Satan was going about “desiring to have them” in 
the smelting fire which was to test their faith. It was therefore a 
fitting opportunity for St Peter, who had himself known the 
shame of falling in the hour of trial, when Satan had “sifted him 
as wheat,” to fulfil his Master’s command, “When thou hast 
turned again strengthen thy brethren.” 

In v. 12 St Peter says that his object in writing to them was 
(a) to encourage them, (Ὁ) to testify that this is in very truth 
the “grace” or “loving favour” of God, and bid them stand fast 
‘in it. What is this “favour”? Does it refer only to the imme- 
diately preceding section about persecution or to the whole theme 
of the Epistle? Probably to the latter, including the thought of 
suffering as one item in God’s work of loving favour. Their 
privileges were part of God’s eternal purpose, the extension of 
God’s “favour” to Gentiles (i. 10) had been long foretold and is 
now revealed. 

It is on that “favour” that they are to set their hope (i. 13), 
Husbands and wives are fellow-heirs of the “favour” or free gift 
of life iii. 7. God’s “favour” is only bestowed upon the humble 
v.6: let them therefore humble themselves to bear the discipline 
of suffering which He is sending upon them. It is the God of all 
“favour” who called them to eternal glory in Christ (v. 10): if 
the road to that glory leads through a short tract of suffering it 
is no mark of disfavour but rather of favour, because such suffering 
is the prelude to the glory. 

The three main topics of the Epistle are: (a) the privileges of 
Christians, (0) the consequent duties of Christians, (6) the present 
trials of Christians. These three topics respectively form the 
theme of the three sections into which the Epistle may be divided : 
(a) i.—ii. 10, (6) ii. 11—iv. 11, (6) iv. 12—v. 14. But the Epistle 
is no formal treatise capable of being strictly analysed, and the 
three topics are to some extent interwoven throughout. 


(a) The privileges of Christians. 

They are the New Israel of God, chosen by God’s foreknowledge, 
sanctified by the Holy Spirit, sprinkled with the Blood of Christ 
as the Covenant Victim. They are begotten to a living hope of 
attaining to an incorruptible inheritance which has all along 
been kept in reserve for them. Prophets long ago foretold this 


OCCASION AND PURPOSE lxxvii 


extension of God’s favour to them. Angels are watching this 
development of God’s all-embraeing plan of love with eager eyes. 
They have been ransomed from slavery, as Israel was from 
Egypt. They are living stones built into a holy Temple of which 
Christ is the corner stone. They are a holy nation, a peculiar 
people, a royal priesthood. They are begotten by the word of 
God who lives and abides for ever. They are called to eternal 


glory. 
(b) The duties of Christians. 


Such privileges carry with them corresponding responsibilities. 
In the first section therefore St Peter bids his readers to gird 
themselves for active service with sober earnestness and confident 
hopefulness (i. 13). They must prove themselves obedient children. 
In the days of their ignorance it was more excusable to follow 
the shifting fashion of their own wayward desires, but now they 
have been called by One who is all-holy and therefore they must 
be holy (14—16). In claiming God as their Father they must 
remember that He is also the Judge, by whom everyman’s work 
must be tried, and He will not shew partiality or favouritism to 
His children. They must therefore pass their time as sojourners 
in the world in reverent fear of offending God (17). 

The seed from which they are begotten is nothing less than 
the word of God who lives and abides for ever, its fruits in their 
lives should therefore be of the same character. Their love for 
their fellow-members in God’s family must be heartfelt and un- 
relaxed. Malice, guile, hypocrisy or unkind talk must be put 
away (i. 22—ii. 1). 

In the exercise of their “holy priesthood” they must offer 
spiritual sacrifices to God (ii. 5). As a “peculiar people” it is 
their task to proclaim the excellences of the God who has called 
them out of darkness (ii. 9). 

In the second section the duties of Christians are emphasized 
in fuller detail. They must remember that they are only settlers 
in the world whose true home is in heaven, but there are all 
kinds of fleshly lusts carrying on a constant campaign against 
their soul, and from these they must abstain (ii. 11). They must 
set an example of honourable conduct to the heathen ae: 
whom they live (12). 


xxviii INTRODUCTION 


Though they are not of the world they are in the world and 
must submit to all the institutions which God has appointed for 
its orderly governance. The state, the household, the family 
are all intended to be earthly copies of divine ideals. As citizens 
they must honour the Emperor and magistrates, Christian liberty 
must not be misused as a cloak for social or political anarchy. 
_ They are only free because they are God’s bondslaves. As such 
they must give all men their due honour, and towards their 
brethren in Christ this means love. Though they can no longer 
worship the Emperor, reverent fear of God in no way excludes 
but rather demands honour to the Emperor (ii. 13—17). 

As members of an earthly household the fear of God should 
prompt servants to submit to their masters, even though they 
may be unreasonable and awkward to deal with. To suffer in- 
justice with patience will win God’s verdict of “well done.” It 
is the path which the Master trod and the servant is called to 
tread in His steps (11. 18—22). 

As members of an earthly home wives should submit to their 
husbands even though they are still heathen. The spectacle of 
a Christian wife’s chaste conduct is a more potent force than 
argument to win her husband to the cause of Christ. Instead 
of outward finery the wife’s truest adornment is a meek and 
quiet spirit. If they claim to have proved themselves true 
daughters of Sarah they must imitate her submission. The 
saintly women of old owed their charm to their persistence in 
well-doing, undisturbed by any excited exhibition of panic (iii. 
1—6). But such submissive conduct on the part of the wife 
involves a corresponding duty on the part of a Christian husband. 
Husband and wife not only share an earthly home but are also 
co-heirs of the gift of life. Both are “‘chosen vessels” of God, but 
the wife is cast in a more fragile mould and therefore needs to be 
treated with the greater honour. Conjugal intercourse must be 
based upon this conception, otherwise the blessing promised to 
united prayer will be curtailed (iii. 7). 

Besides such particular duties there are obligations binding 
upon all Christians alike. Unanimity, sympathy, love ~ as 
brethren, tenderness, humility should be the characteristics of 
the Christian society. There should be no spirit of retaliation 
of “evil for evil, or reviling for reviling.” Rather curses should 


OCCASION AND PURPOSE Ixxix 


be met with blessings, for blessing is the special inheritance to 
which Christians are called. -, 

The allusion to evil and reviling suggests advice as to how it 
may be avoided by devoted well-doing (iii. 13). But if, in spite 
of all their efforts, Christians are called upon to suffer for right- 
eousness’ sake they must not be panic-stricken. If only they 
keep the presence of Christ as their Master enshrined in their 
hearts, they will silence their revilers by living Christ-like lives, 
and must be ready to answer for their faith with meekness and 
reverent fear. 

Suffering should be faced in the same spirit with which Christ 
met His sufferings in the flesh (iv. 1). Their past career of 
heathen profligacy has been all too long. The remainder of their 
earthly life must be regulated by the will of God and not by the 
wayward desires of man (iv. 2). Christians should live in watch- 
fulness and soberminded prayer because the end of all things is 
approaching. Above all their love towards one another should 
never be relaxed (iv. 7 f.). 

They are stewards whom God has entrusted with varied gifts 
to be used in His service. Claims upon their hospitality should 
be met without a murmur. Those who have gifts of utterance 
must remember that their message is not their own but God’s. 
Those whose duty it is to minister must do their work with all 
the strength that God gives them (iv. 10f.). 

In c. v. St Peter gives a special message to the Presbyters. 
He bids them shepherd God’s flock not under a sense of compul- 
sion or with any sordid mercenary motives but willingly and 
gladly, not domineering over those entrusted to their care but 
leading them by their example (v. 1—4). 

Those who are junior in age or office should humbly submit 
to their seniors. 

In short all Christians should gird themselves with humility 
in their relations towards each. other, and above all in their 
attitude towards God, humbly submitting to whatever discipline 
of suffering He may impose upon them. To be anxious and 
worried is to distrust God’s loving care (v. 5—7). 


_ (0) The present trials of Christians. 
In i. 7 the varied trials through which Christians have to pass 


Ixxx . INTRODUCTION 


are described as the smelting fire to test the purity of their 
faith. 

In ii. 12 Christians are liable to be denounced as malefactors. 

In ii. 18 servants who suffer wrongfully are to bear it patiently. 
By so doing they may imitate Christ’s example and follow in His 
steps. ; 

In iii. 9 Christians are to meet revilings with blessings. (iii. 13) 
Zealous devotion to what is good will probably spare them from 
injury, but if they should be required to suffer for righteousness’ 
sake it is a blessed thing. If only they maintain a good conscience 
by persistent good conduct they may shame their maligners into 
silence. But if God’s will should require them to suffer it is far 
better to suffer for well-doing than for evil-doing. Let them 
consider the sufferings of Christ. His death was: 


(a) The termination of sin once and for all (ἅπαξ). (Ὁ) The 
opportunity for new and wider service. By dying He was able 
to win access to God for the Gentiles (ὑμᾶς). Set free by death 
His human spirit was quickened for new activity in the world 
of spirits. He went and preached to the spirits in prison. (6) It 
was the prelude to glory. He who then suffered and died is 
now seated at the right hand of God, supreme over angels, 
principalities and powers. 


(iv. 1) Christians should therefore face sufferings in the flesh, 
armed with the same conceptions which enabled Christ to endure 
the Cross and despise the shame. They should regard suffering 
in the flesh as a means of terminating the old regime of sin and 
fleshly life, to live a new life unto God in the spirit. 

In iv. 12 St Peter again reminds his readers that sufferings are 
a smelting fire to test their faith and character. They must not 
therefore be regarded as a strange misfortune happening by chance. 
It should be a matter of joy to have fellowship in Christ’s suffer- 
ings in order that they may have exultant joy at the revelation 
of His glory. To be reproached in the name of Christ is a blessed 
thing for it means that the spirit of that “glory” is already 
resting upon them. 

The process of judgment is already beginning and it starts 
with God’s own household first. Even in these initial stages 
of judgment the process by which the righteous are judged and 


OCCASION AND PURPOSE Ixxxi 


saved is a painful one, but how far more terrible will the final 
Stages be when the ungodly and sinners are dealt with. Those 
who suffer according to God’s will should commit their lives to 
Him, as to a faithful Creator, who may be trusted to deal justly 
with His own handiwork. 

In v. 6—10 Christians should submit humbly to God’s hand 
in patiently enduring suffering. In one sense their sufferings 
are the work of Satan, for he employs them to try and devour 
his prey by inducing Christians to give way. But in another 
sense they are the accomplishment of a divine purpose of loving 
favour, and that same purpose is being accomplished in the 
Christian brotherhood in other parts of the world. In calling 
His children to His eternal glory in Christ God requires them 
to pass through a brief period of suffering, and He will provide 
them with what is necessary to refit, stablish and strengthen 
them. 


9. DocTRINE IN 1 PETER. 


Nearly every clause in the Creed can be supported by passages 
in the Epistle. 
1 believe in i. 2. According to the foreknowledge of 
God the Father God the Father. 
i. 3. Blessed be the God and Father of 
our Lord Jesus Christ. 
i. 17. If ye invoke as Father. 
Almighty iv. 11. To whom is the glory and the 
(παντοκράτωρ) κράτος for ever. 
v.6. The mighty hand of God. 
Maker of heaven ἰἴν. 19θ. A faithful creator. 


and earth 

And in Jesus i. 3. Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. 
Christ His only 

Son 

our Lord ili. 14. Sanctify Christ as Lord in your 


hearts. 
who was incarnate Christ’s Body ii. 24, Flesh iii. 18, iv. 1, 
Blood i. 19, Human spirit iii. 18 are 
; ‘referred to. 
who suffered i. 11. The sufferings destined for Messiah. 


lxxxii 


was crucified 


dead 


He descended into 
Hell 


He rose again 


He ascended into 
heaven 

He sitteth at the 
right hand of God 


He shall come 
again with glory. 


To judge both 
the quick and the 
dead 


INTRODUCTION 


ii. 21. Christ suffered for us. 

ii. 23. When He suffered He threatened 
not. 

iv. 1. Christ having suffered in the flesh. 

iv. 13. Ye have fellowship in the sufferings 
of Christ. 

v. 1. A witness of the sufferings of Christ. 

i. 2. Sprinkling of the Blood of Christ. 

ii. 24. Who bare our sins in His own Body 
on the tree. 

111, 18. Christ died (ἀπέθανε) for sins once, 
being put to death in the flesh. 

iii, 19. He went (in His human spirit 
quickened by death) and preached to the 
spirits in prison. 

i. 3. By the resurrection of Jesus Christ 
from the dead. 

i. 21. God raised Him from the dead. 

iii. 21, By the resurrection of Jesus Christ. 

iii. 99. Having gone into heaven. 


i. 21. God raised Him from the dead and 
gave Him glory. 

iii. 22. Who is at the right hand of God, 
angels and principalities and powers being 
made subject to Him. 

i. 7,13. At the revelation of Jesus Christ. 

iv. 18. At the revelation of His glory. 


ον. 4. When the chief Shepherd ‘is mani- 


fested. 
In St Peter the judgment is ascribed to God 
rather than to Christ. 


4.17. If ye invoke as Father Him who 


without respect of persons judgeth accord- 
ing to every man’s work. 

iv. 5. Who shall give account to Him who 
is in readiness to judge the quick and the 
dead. 

But in v. 4 the bestowal of the crown of life 


DOCTRINE IN I PETER Ixxxili 


1 believe in 
the Holy Ghost 


Who spake by 
the prophets 


The Holy Catholic 
Church 


is connected with the manifestation of the 
chief Shepherd, i.e. Christ. 

i. 2. In sanctification of the Spirit. 

i. 12. Those that preached good tidings to 
you by the Holy Ghost sent from heaven. 

iv. 14. The Spirit of the glory even the 
Spirit of God doth rest upon you. (See 
note ad loc.) 

i. 20. Prophets—searching what or what 
manner of time the Spirit of Christ (or 
Messiah) which was in them was signifying 
in testifying beforehand the sufferings 
destined for Messiah. (See note ad loc.) 

The full divinity of the Holy Spirit is 
implied by the fact that He is coupled 
with God the Father and mentioned before 
Jesus Christ in i. 2. Also the fact that 
the inspiration of O.T. prophets and 
Christian teachers is ascribed to Him, 
and that He now rests on believers in 
their sufferings presupposes His divinity 
and omnipresence. 

As there are so many indirect traces of 
Ephesians in this Epistle it is somewhat 
strange that neither the word ἐκκλησία 
nor the illustration of the Body of Christ 
should be found in it. 

But in i. 1 Christians are called ἐκλεκτοί. 
They are built as living stones into a 
spiritual temple of which Christ is the 
chief. corner-stone. They are γένος ἐκ- 
λεκτόν, βασίλειον ἱεράτευμα, ἔθνος ἅγιον, 
λαὸς εἰς περιποίησιν. In other words they 
are the New Israel of God, which is 
practically what our Lord meant when 
He spoke of building His ἐκκλησία in 
the promise to St Peter, Mt. xvi. 18. 
Again the description of Christians as 
being “in Christ” iii. 16, v. 10, 14 implies 


lxxxiv INTRODUCTION 


that they are regarded as members of His 
Body. Christians are a brotherhood, the 
house of God. The Christian society from 
which St Peter is writing is ἡ συνεκλεκτή. 

1 believe in iii. 21. Baptism doth save us. 

one Baptism for 3 

the remission of 


sins 

The resurrection This is not expressly mentioned but is 

of the body implied in the “living hope” to which 
Christians are begotten again by the 
resurrection of Jesus Christ i. 3, and the 
instruction to rejoice in sufferings as a 
prelude to glory would be meaningless 
apart from a sure and certain hope of 
resurrection. 

The life Is implied in the “inheritance incorruptible 

everlasting and undefiled and that fadeth not away” 


i. 4, and also in the ‘“‘ crown of glory” v. 4, 
and the eternal glory to which Christians 
are called v. 10. 
Thus the only clauses of the Apostles’ Creed for which no 
direct support is afforded by the Epistle are: 


He came down from heaven. 

Was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary. 
Under Pontius Pilate. 

Buried. 

The Communion of Saints. 


St Peter's conception of God. 


He is the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ i. 3. He 
is our Father but also our Judge, and will not shew any undue 
favouritism to His children i. 17. He is a faithful creator and 
_ therefore His creatures can entrust their souls to His keeping in 
perfect confidence despite man’s cruelty or injustice iv. 19. He 
cares for us and therefore we can cast all our anxiety upon Him 
v. 7. He isa Being of absolute holiness who demands that His 
children should be holy i. 15—16. He lives and abides for ever 
i. 23. His purpose of redemption was foreknown to Him before 


DOCTRINE IN I PETER Ixxxv 


the foundation of the world i. 2, 20. It is He who begets us 
again to a living hope i. 3. He calls usi. 15. He is a God of all 
favour, even in the discipline of suffering by which He calls us to 
glory v. 10. His eyes are over the righteous and His ears open 
to their prayer but His face is against those that do evil iii. 12. 
All human institutions whether in the state, the household or 
the family are ordained by Him ii. 13—iii.7. He is the Shepherd 
and Overseer of our souls ii. 25, The Church is His flock v. 2. 
His temple ii. 5. His house iv. 17. Christians are His stewards 
and are intended to use all His varied gifts in His service iv. 10. 
He resists the proud but gives grace to the humble y. 5. 


St Peter's conception of Jesus Christ. 


He is very Man. He suffered in the flesh iv. 1, was put to 
death in the flesh iii. 18, and thereby was quickened in His 
(human) spirit for further work in the unseen world. His blood 
as the Covenant Victim is sprinkled upon Christians i. 1. It 
was the price of their redemption i. 19. In character He was 
sinless, a Lamb without spot or blemish i. 19. He did no sin 
neither was guile found in His mouth ii. 22. He was patient 
under sufferings and injustice, because He committed Himself 
to the just judgment of God ii. 23. In fact He was the ideal 
Servant of the Lord described in Isaiah liii. He is our example 
‘ii. 21, our High Priest through whom our spiritual sacrifices 
must be presented ii. 5. He presents men to God iii. 18. He 
has ascended into heaven and is at the right hand of the Father 
exalted above all angelic powers iii. 22. 

Suffering in His name is a high privilege iv. 14. He will be 

manifested as the chief Shepherd v. 4. His revelation is referred 
to i. 7, 13. 
_ A few passages, if isolated and exaggerated, might be mis- 
interpreted as suggesting that Christ was a subordinate Being, 
e.g. He was foreknown by God i. 20, raised from the dead by God 
i. 21, chosen by God ii. 4. In i. 3 God is described as His God 
and Father. 

But such a view is disproved by numerous other passages. He 
is our Lord i. 3. He is coupled with the Father and the Holy 
_ Spirit i. 2. He is to be sanctified as Lord in our hearts iii. 15, 
language which in Isaiah viii. 13 is applied to Jehovah of hosts. 


Ixxxvi INTRODUCTION 


Similarly other passages which refer to Jehovah in the O.T., “Ὁ 
taste and see that the Lord is gracious” (Ps. xxxiv. 8; 1 Pet. ii. 3) 
and the stone of stumbling—the corner-stone (Isaiah xxviii. 16— 
of the presence of Jehovah) 1 Pet. ii. 6, are applied to Christ. 
The description of Christians as being “in Christ” iii. 16, v. 14 
implies His divinity. It is only “through Christ” that Christians 
are faithful as resting in God, “Through Him” their spiritual 
sacrifices are offered ii. 5. “Through Him” God is glorified by 
the faithfulness of His members iv. 11. “In Him” Christians 
are called by God to eternal glory v. 10. 

Again St Peter’s doctrine of the atonement is that Christ bare 
our sins ii, 24, that by His stripes we were healed ii. 24—that 
His death was the termination of the regime of sin once and for 
all iii, 18, and is intended to produce similar death unto sin in 
His members ii. 24, iv. 1, that by His blood the Gentiles were 
redeemed from the slavery of sin i. 18, that by dying Christ 
presented them (who were once far off) to God iii. 18. 

All this would be unintelligible if St Peter regarded Jesus as 
nothing more than a human martyr. 


10. Tur GREEK TEXT AND VERSIONS. 


The Greek Text. 
(1) Uncial Manuscripts written in capitals, 


ἐξ. CodexSinaiticus (fourth century), discovered by Tischendorf 
at Mount Sinai, now at St Petersburg. 

A. Codex Alexandrinus (fifth century) in the British Museum. 

B. Codex Vaticanus (fourth century) in the Vatican Library 
at Rome. 

_ C. Codex Ephraemi (fifth century), a palimpsest with some 
of the works of Ephraem Syrus (299—378) written over the 
original text, now in the Royal Library at Paris. 

K. Codex Mosquensis (ninth century) contains the Catholic 
and Pauline Epistles and came from the Monastery of St Dionysius 
on Mount Athos. 

L. Codex Angelicus (ninth century) contains part of Acts, 
the Catholic Epistles and the Pauline with part of Hebrews. It 
belongs to the Augustinian Monks at Rome. 


GREEK TEXT AND VERSIONS | \xxxvii 


P, Codex Porphyrianus (ninth century) contains the Acts, 
all the Epistles, the Apocalypse and a few fragments of 
4 Maccabees. It was found by Tischendorf in 1863 in the pos- 
session of Bishop Porphyry. It is a palimpsest with fragments 
of the commentary of Euthalius written over the original text. 

These are the only uncial MSS. of the Catholic Epistles. 


(2) Minuscules or cursive MSS. expressed by numerals. Of 
these the most important are: 

13 (=33 Gosp. 17 St Paul) (ninth century). 

31 (=69 Gosp. 37 St Paul) (fourteenth century) at Leicester. 

34 (=61 Gosp. 40 St Paul) (fifteenth or sixteenth century). 


(3) Versions. 


Latin. Only a few fragments of 1 Peter are extant in Old 
Latin vss. m (=the speculum of Mai) and g. The Latin 
Vulgate (lat. vg) was made by Jerome 385 a.D., of which countless 
MSS. are extant. 

Syriac. 

(a) The Peshitto (syr vg) (? third century). 
(Ὁ) The Harclean (syr hl) (seventh century) based on an 
older version of Philoxenus (sixth century). 

Egyptian. | 

(a) The Bohairic or Memphitic, the version of Lower Egypt 
(?second century). 

(Ὁ) The Sahidic or Thebaic, not much later, the version of 
Upper Egypt. 


Armenian (fifth century). 


11. LITERATURE. 


For a fuller list of literature bearing upon the Epistle see 
Dr Chase’s Article, Hastings’ D. of B. iii. 817 f. 
The following commentaries or books may be mentioned in 
> alphabetical order : 
Alford, fourth edition, 1871. 
Bigg, International Critical Commentary, 1901. 


Ixxxvili INTRODUCTION 


Chase, Articles on “St Peter,” and “1 Peter,” Hastings’ D. of B. 
ili. 756—796. 

Cook, Speaker's Commentary, 1881. 

Hort, on 1 Peter i. 1—ii. 17, 1898. 

Hort, Christian Ecclesia, 1897. 

Hort, Judaistic Christianity, 1894. 

Kiihl, sixth edition, Meyer’s Commentary, 1897. 

Leighton, Devotional Exposition, 1845. 

Lightfoot, “St Paul and the Three” in Galatians, 1865. 

Lightfoot, “St Peter in Rome” in Clement IT, 481 ff. 

Mason, in Ellicott’s Commentary, 1883. 

Masterman, on 1 Peter, 1900. 

Plumptre, in Cambridge Bible for Schools, 1880. 

Ramsay, The Church in the Roman Empire, 1893. 


ΠΕΤΡΟΥ A. 


1 4ITETPOS ἀπόστολος ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐκλεκτοῖς 
παρεπιδήμοις διασπορᾶς Πόντου, Ταλατίας, Καππα- 
δοκίας, ᾿Ασίας, καὶ Βιθυνίας, Ξκατὰ πρόγνωσιν θεοῦ 
πατρός, ἐν ἁγιασμῷ πνεύματος, εἰς ὑπακοὴν καὶ 
ῥαντισμὸν αἵματος ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ" χάρις ὑμῖν καὶ 
εἰρήνη πληθυνθείη. 

δεὐλογητὸς ὁ θεὸς καὶ πατὴρ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν 
Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ὁ κατὰ τὸ πολὺ αὐτοῦ ἔλεος ἀναγεν- 
νήσας ἡμᾶς εἰς ἐλπίδα ζῶσαν δι᾿ ἀναστάσεως ᾿Ἰησοῦ 
Χριστοῦ ἐκ νεκρῶν, “εἰς κληρονομίαν ἄφθαρτον καὶ 
ἀμίαντον καὶ ἀμάραντον, τετηρημένην ἐν οὐρανοῖς εἰς 
ὑμᾶς τοὺς ἐν δυνάμει θεοῦ φρουρουμένους διὰ πίστεως 
εἰς σωτηρίαν ἑτοίμην ἀποκαλυφθῆναι ἐν καιρῷ ἐσχάτῳ. 
δὲν ᾧ ἀγαλλιᾶσθε, ὀλίγον ἄρτι εἰ δέον λυπηθέντες ἐν 
ποικίλοις πειρασμοῖς, “iva τὸ δοκίμιον ὑμῶν τῆς 
πίστεως πολυτιμότερον χρυσίου τοῦ ἀπολλυμένου διὰ 
πυρὸς δὲ δοκιμαζομένου εὑρεθῇ εἰς ἔπαινον καὶ δόξαν 
καὶ τιμὴν ἐν ἀποκαλύψει ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ. ϑ8ϑὸν οὐκ 
ἰδόντες ἀγαπᾶτε, εἰς ὃν ἄρτι μὴ ὁρῶντες πιστεύοντες 
δὲ ἀγαλλιᾶτε χαρᾷ ἀνεκλαλήτῳ καὶ δεδοξασμένῃ, 
θ κομιζόμενον τὸ τέλος τῆς πίστεως σωτηρίαν ψυχῶν. 
Ὁ Περὶ ἧς σωτηρίας ἐξεζήτησαν καὶ ἐξηραύνησαν 


I PETER . A 


« a? 


ΣΝ ee es Ee me [1 10 





fol e \ “Ὁ > lal 
προφῆται οἱ περὶ THs εἰς ὑμᾶς χάριτος προφητεύσαντες, 
Ἡ ἐραυνῶντες εἰς τίνα ἢ ποῖον καιρὸν ἐδήλου τὸ ἐν 
αὐτοῖς πνεῦμα Χριστοῦ προμαρτυρόμενον τὰ εἰς 
U fal 
Χριστὸν παθήματα καὶ τὰς peta ταῦτα δόξας" “ols 
ἀπεκαλύφθη ὅτι οὐχ ἑαυτοῖς ὑμῖν δὲ διηκόνουν αὐτά, ἃ 
a a \ “ a 
νῦν ἀνηγγέλη ὑμῖν διὰ τῶν εὐαγγελισαμένων ὑμᾶς 
πνεύματι ἁγίῳ ἀποσταλέντι ἀπ᾽ οὐρανοῦ, εἰς ἃ 
> a A / 
ἐπιθυμοῦσιν ἄγγελοι παρακύψαι. 
BA ye / \ > / A ὃ / ¢ a 
ιὸ ἀναζωσάμενοι τὰς ὀσφύας τῆς διανοίας ὑμῶν, 
YA [ἢ > J τ mass. ἢ \ / ae 
νήφοντες τελείως, ἐλπίσατε ἐπὶ THY φερομένην ὑμῖν 
χάριν ἐν ἀποκαλύψει ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ. “as τέκνα 
ὑπακοῆς, μὴ συνσχηματιζόμενοι ταῖς πρότερον ἐν τῇ 
> U ς a 3 θ / 15 > \ \ \ 7ὔ 
ἀγνοίᾳ ὑμῶν ἐπιθυμίαις, αλλὰ. κατὰ τὸν καλέσαντα 
ὑμᾶς ἅγιον καὶ αὐτοὶ ἅγιοι ἐν πάσῃ ἀναστροφῇ 
γενήθητε, %8vore γέγραπται [ὅτι] Ἅγιοι Ececde, ὅτι ἐγὼ 
Srioc. Τἴ καὶ εἰ πὰτέρὰ ἐπικἀλεῖοθε τὸν ἀπροσωπολήμπτως 
/ \ ε 4 4 > / \ a 
κρίνοντα κατὰ τὸ ἑκάστου ἔργον, ἐν φόβῳ τὸν τῆς 
“ / [τ > 
παροικίας ὑμῶν χρόνον ἀναστράφητε" ᾿δεἰδότες ὅτι OY 
φθαρτοῖς, ἀργυρίῳ ἢ χρυσίῳ, ἐλγτρώθητε ἐκ τῆς ματαίας 
a a > \ 
ὑμῶν ἀναστροφῆς πατροπαραδότου, “adda τιμίῳ 
αἵματι ὡς ἀμνοῦ ἀμώμου καὶ ἀσπίλου Χριστοῦ, 
z an 
0mrpoeyvwopévou μὲν πρὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου, φανερω- 
, Ν See ee / a ~ / ὃ Β' κα al 21 \ ὃ > 
θέντος δὲ ἐπ᾿ ἐσχάτου τῶν χρόνων δι ὑμᾶς ““τοὺς δι 
A \ “ 
αὐτοῦ πιστοὺς εἰς θεὸν τὸν ἐγείραντα αὐτὸν ἐκ νεκρῶν 
\ / > A 4 v4 \ , Cc oA \ >, iS 
καὶ δόξαν αὐτῷ δόντα, ὥστε τὴν πίστιν ὑμῶν καὶ ἐλπίδα 
\ ic.  Ὰ ς , 
εἶναι eis θεόν. 2T as ψυχὰς ὑμῶν ἡγνικότες 
a a A 4 , 
ἐν τῇ ὑπακοῇ τῆς ἀληθείας εἰς φιλαδελφίαν ἀνυπό- 
> lal 
Kpitov ἐκ καρδίας ἀλλήλους ἀγαπήσατε ἐκτενῶς, 
᾿» a“ aA > ἣν 
38 ἀναγεγεννημένοι οὐκ ἐκ σπορᾶς φθαρτῆς ἀλλὰ 
ἀφθάρτου, διὰ λόγου Ζῶντος θεοΐ KAL MENONTOC* 
24 διότι 


2 11] TETPOY A 3 





πᾶσὰ CApZ ὡς YOPTOC, 
Kal T&cA AdZA αὐτῆς “ὡς ἄνθος χόρτογ᾽ 
ἐξηράνθη ὁ χόρτος, 
‘ 2 3 il 
Kal TO ANOOC EZETTECEN* 
25 ‘ A cn U , > \ 7A 
TO δὲ ῥῆμὰ Kypioy μένει εἰς TON aid@Na. 
A / > \ ta \ 3 \ > ς la) 
τοῦτο δέ ἐστιν TO ῥῆμα TO εὐαγγελισθὲν εἰς ὑμᾶς. 
1? / 5 “Ὁ δ \ 4. lA 
2 Ἰτ᾽᾿Αποθέμενοι οὖν πᾶσαν κακίαν καὶ πάντα δόλον 
\ « / \ θό \ 4, / 2 e 
καὶ ὑπόκρισιν καὶ φθόνους καὶ πάσας καταλαλιάς, 20s 
ἀρτιγέννητα βρέφη τὸ λογικὸν ἄδολον γάλα ἐπίύπο- 
θήσατε, ἵνα ἐν αὐτῷ αὐξηθῆτε εἰς σωτηρίαν, 5 εἰ 
ἐγεΐοδοθε ὅτι χρηοτὸς ὁ κύριοο ‘arpos ὃν προσερχόμενοι, 
, -“" «ς \ ᾽ / \ > , \ 
λίθον ζῶντα, ὑπὸ ἀνθρώπων μὲν ATIOAEAOKIMACMENON παρὰ 
δὲ θεῷ ἐκλεκτὸν ἔντιμον PKal αὐτοὶ ὡς λίθοι ζῶντες 
οἰκοδομεῖσθε οἶκος πνευματικὸς εἰς ἱεράτευμα ἅγιον, 
ἀνενέγκαι πνευματικὰς θυσίας εὐπροσδέκτους θεῷ διὰ 
b a x a. 6§ / / > a 
Inood Χριστοῦ" 5διότι περιέχει ἐν γραφῇ 
δοὺ τίθημι ἐν Σιὼν λίθον ἐκλεκτὸν ἀκρογωνιδῖον 
ἔντιμον, 
Kal ὁ πιοτεύων ETT δύτᾷ OY μὲ KATAICYYNOH. 
ὑμῖν οὖν ἡ τιμὴ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν" ἀπιστοῦσιν δὲ 
λίθος ON ATTEAOKIMACAN οἱ οἰκοδομοῦντες OYTOC ἐγενήθη 
εἰς κεφάλην γωνίδο ϑκαὶ λίθος προοκόμμάτος Kal πέτρδ 
οκὰἀνδλάλου᾽ οὗ προσκόπτουσιν τῷ λόγῳ ἀπειθοῦντες" εἰς 
ὃ καὶ ἐτέθησαν. ὑμεῖς δὲ γένος ἐκλεκτόν, βΒδοίλειον 
_lepdteyma, ἔθνος ἅγιον, Aadc εἰς περιποίησιν, ὅπως τὰς 
ἀρετὰς ἐξαγγείλητε τοῦ ἐκ σκότους ὑμᾶς καλέσαντος εἰς 
τὸ θαυμαστὸν αὐτοῦ φῶς" of ποτε οΥ̓ Aadc νῦν δὲ Aadc 
n e > > , Lal \ > / 
θεοῦ, οἱ οὐκ HAEHMENO! νῦν δὲ EACHOENTEC. 


1’ Αγαπητοί, παρακαλῷ ὡς πδὸροίκογο Kal πὰρεπιδλή- 
Moye ἀπέχεσθαι τῶν σαρκικῶν ἐπιθυμιῶν, αἵτινες 
A2 


4 METPOY A [2 11 





στρατεύονται κατὰ τῆς ψυχῆς" ᾿ὥτὴν ἀναστροφὴν ὑμῶν 
ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν ἔχοντες καλήν, ἵνα, ἐν ᾧ καταλαλοῦσιν 
ὑμῶν ὡς κακοποιῶν, ἐκ τῶν καλῶν ἔργων ἐποπτεύοντες 
δοξάσωσι τὸν θεὸν ἐν ἡμέρᾳ ἐπιοκοπῆο. 
18 ηγοτάγητε πάσῃ ἀνθρωπίνῃ κτίσει διὰ τὸν 
4, ᾿ by ~ τ ς / 14 ¥ e / e 
κύριον" εἴτε βασιλεῖ ὡς ὑπερέχοντι, 1" εἴτε ἡγεμόσιν ὡς 
δι’ αὐτοῦ πεμπομένοις εἰς ἐκδίκησιν κακοποιῶν ἔπαινον 
δὲ ἀγαθοποιῶν" ᾿δ(ὅτι οὕτως ἐστὶν τὸ θέλημα τοῦ θεοῦ, 
ἀγαθοποιοῦντας φιμοῖν τὴν τῶν ἀφρόνων ἀνθρώπων 
3 7 16 e > 40 \ \ « > ΄ 
ἀγνωσίαν") “ws ἐλεύθεροι, καὶ μὴ ὡς ἐπικάλυμμα 
ΝΜ rf / \ / ? ? «ς κ 
ἔχοντες τῆς κακίας τὴν ἐλευθερίαν, ἀλλ᾿ ὡς θεοῦ 
ὃ a 17 U / \ ὃ > a 
οὔλοι. πάντας τιμήσατε, τὴν ἀδελφότητα ἀγαπᾶτε, 
τὸν θεὸν φοβεῖεθε, τὸν Βδοιλέὰ τιμᾶτε. BQO; 
οἰκέται ὑποτασσόμενοι ἐν παντὶ φόβῳ τοῖς δεσπόταις, 
οὐ μόνον τοῖς ἀγαθοῖς καὶ ἐπιεικέσιν ἀλλὰ καὶ τοῖς 
σκολιοῖς. ϑτοῦτο γὰρ χάρις εἰ διὰ rune oak θεοῦ 
ὑποφέρει τις λύπας πάσχων ἀδίκως" ποῖον γὰρ κλέος 
> c / \ / 
εἰ ἁμαρτάνοντες καὶ κολαφιζόμενοι ὑπομενεῖτε ; ἀλλ᾽ 
εἰ ἀγαθοποιοῦντες καὶ πάσχοντες ὑπομενεῖτε, τοῦτο 
\ θΘ a 91 > ww a 5 40 ef \ 
χάρις παρὰ θεῷ. eis τοῦτο yap ἐκλήθητε, OTL καὶ 
Χριστὸς ἔπαθεν ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν, ὑμῖν ὑπολεμπάνων ὑπο- 
γραμμὸν ἵνα ἐπακολουθήσητε τοῖς ἴχνεσιν αὐτοῦ" 2Ξὸς 
AMAPTIAN ΟΥ̓Κ ἐποίησεν οὐδὲ εὑρέθη λόλος ἐν τᾷ CTOMATI 
> nA. 934 4 ae! ’ 50 U 
ayToy* 0s λοιδορούμενος οὐκ ἀντελοιδόρει, πάσχων 
οὐκ ἠπείλει, παρεδίδου δὲ τῷ κρίνοντι δικαίως: **d5 
τὰς AMAPTIAC ἡμῶν δὐτὸς ἀνήνεγκεν ἐν τῷ σώματι αὐτοῦ 
ἐπὶ τὸ ξύλον, ἵνα ταῖς ἁμαρτίαις ἀπογενόμενοι τῇ 
ὃ 4, / φ- n , 2.» 25 2 a 
καιοσύνῃ ζήσωμεν" οὗ τῷ μώλωπι IAOHTE. NTE yap 
«ς , , > \ > / lel > \ 
ὧς TIPOBATA TIAAN@MENO!, ἀλλὰ ἐπεστράφητε νῦν ἐπὶ 
τὸν ποιμένα καὶ ἐπίσκοπον τῶν ψυχῶν ὑμῶν. 
a a / 

3 Ὁμοίως γυναῖκες ὑποτασσόμεναι τοῖς ἰδίοις 


3 13] TIETPOY A 5 





ἀνδράσιν, iva εἴ τινες ἀπειθοῦσιν τῷ λόγῳ διὰ τῆς 
n tal 3 ar Soe / U 
TOV γυναικῶν ἀναστροφῆς ἄνευ λόγου κερδηθήσονται 
Ξέποπτεύσαντες τὴν ἐν φόβῳ ἁγνὴν ἀναστροφὴν ὑμῶν. 
ϑὦὧν ἔστω οὐχ ὁ ἔξωθεν ἐμπλοκῆς τριχῶν καὶ περιθέσεως 
/ a , ς 7 / 4 » ψς -¢ \ 
χρυσίων ἢ ἐνδύσεως ἱματίων κόσμος, “ἀλλ᾽ ὁ κρυπτὸς 
A 7] Ν » “Ὁ ’ Ul Δ᾽... 4 / Ἁ 
τῆς καρδίας ἄνθρωπος ἐν τῷ ἀφθάρτῳ τοῦ ἡσυχίου καὶ 
πραέως πνεύματος, ὅ ἐστιν ἐνώπιον τοῦ θεοῦ πολυτελές. 
δοὕτως γάρ ποτε καὶ αἱ ἅγιαι γυναῖκες αἱ ἐλπίζουσαι 
εἰς θεὸν ἐκόσμουν ἑαυτάς, ὑποτασσόμεναι τοῖς ἰδίοις 
’ , 6 id , ¢ / -» 3 / ’ 
ἀνδράσιν, °as Σάρρα ὑπήκουεν τῷ ᾿Αβραάμ, κύριον 
αὐτὸν καλοῦσα" ἧς ἐγενήθητε τέκνα ἀγαθοποιοῦσαι 
καὶ μὴ doBoymenal μηδεμίαν πτόηειν. τοὶ 
ἄνδρες ὁμοίως συνοικοῦντες κατὰ γνῶσιν, ὡς ἀσθενε- 
στέρῳ σκεύει τῷ γυναικείῳ ἀπονέμοντες τιμήν, ὡς καὶ 
συνκληρονόμοι χάριτος ζωῆς, εἰς τὸ μὴ ἐγκόπτεσθαι 
\ ἧς τονε τ ἧι 8ST’ δι. 2 ΄ 
τὰς προσευχὰς ὑμῶν. Τὸ δὲ τέλος πάντες 
ὁμόφρονες, συμπαθεῖς, φιλάδελφοι, εὔσπλαγχνοι, τα- 
πεινόφρονες, Ῥμὴ ἀποδιδόντες κακὸν ἀντὶ κακοῦ ἢ 
λοιδορίαν ἀντὶ λοιδορίας τοὐναντίον δὲ εὐλογοῦντες, 
[ἢ > “ ᾽ / “ 3 / / 
ὅτι εἰς τοῦτο ἐκλήθητε ἵνα εὐλογίαν κληρονομήσητε. 
109 γὰρ θέλων ZWHN ἀγὰπάν 
καὶ ἰδεῖν ἡμέρδἊο ἀγὰθάς 
TIAYCATW) THN γλῶςοδν ἁπὸ κἀκοῦ 
καὶ χείλη τοῦ μὴ AaAHical δόλον, 
112 ’ δὲ > \ a \ , 3 , 
EKKAINAT@ O€ ATTO KAKOY Κὰὶ TIOIHCATW ἄγδθον, 
ZHTHCATW εἰρήνην KAI διωξάτω AYTHN. 
267. deadmoi Kypioy ἐπὶ AiKaloyc 
Kal @TA AaYTOY εἰς AEHCIN AYTON, 
πρόοωπον δὲ Kypioy ἐπὶ TOIOfNTAC KAKA. 
ε al » fa) 
18 Καὶ tis ὁ κακώσων ὑμᾶς ἐὰν τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ ζηλωταὶ 
γένησθε; “adn εἰ καὶ πάσχοιτε διὰ δικαιοσύνην, 


6 TIETPOY A [8 14 





μακάριοι. TON AE POBON aYT@N MH φοβηθῆτε MHAE 
an 15 , δὲ Ν Ν ς ‘ > a 
TAapayOATe, “κύριον δὲ τὸν Χριστὸν dridcate ἐν ταῖς 
καρδίαις ὑμῶν, ἕτοιμοι ἀεὶ πρὸς ἀπολογίαν παντὶ τῷ 
αἰτοῦντι ὑμᾶς λόγον περὶ τῆς ἐν ὑμῖν ἐλπίδος, ἀλλὰ 
\ οἵ. \ ΄ 16 (ὃ BA ’ θή 
μετὰ πραὕτητος καὶ φόβου, ὁ συνείδησιν ἔχοντες ἀγαθήν, 
a an 
iva ἐν ᾧ καταλαλεῖσθε καταισχυνθῶσιν οἱ ἐπηρεάζοντες 
ὑμῶν τὴν ἀγαθὴν ἐν Χριστῷ ἀναστροφήν. “κρεῖττον γὰρ 
ὑγαθοποιοῦντας, εἰ θέλοι τὸ θέλημα τοῦ θεοῦ, πάσχειν ἢ 
, ᾽ 1) 
“Ὁ 18 7 \ Χ \ & A+. 7 A 
κακοποιοῦντας. ‘8dr. καὶ Χριστὸς ἅπαξ περὶ ἁμαρτιῶν 
/ ral a 
ἀπέθανεν, δίκαιος ὑπὲρ ἀδίκων, ἵνα ὑμᾶς προσαγάγῃ τῷ 
θεῷ, θανατωθεὶς μὲν σαρκὶ ζωοποιηθεὶς δὲ πνεύματι" 
192 = \ a > n 4 θ ‘ > 7 
ἐν ᾧ καὶ τοῖς ἐν φυλακῇ πνεύμασιν πορευθεὶς ἐκήρυξεν, 
~amrevOnaoaciv ποτε ὅτε ἀπεξεδέχετο ἡ τοῦ θεοῦ μακρο- 
θυμία ἐν ἡμέραις Νῶε κατασκευαζομένης κιβωτοῦ εἰς 
ἣν ὀλίγοι, τοῦτ᾽ ἔστιν ὀκτὼ ψυχαί, διεσώθησαν SV 
Ὁ“ ΦῚ ἃ ἣν ἐξ a Ἵ 7 a , / 
ὕδατος. “᾿ὸ καὶ ὑμᾶς ἀντίτυπον viv σώζει βάπτισμα, 
» \ > / c/s > \ / 3 [4] 
οὐ σαρκὸς ἀπόθεσις ῥύπου ἀλλὰ συνειδήσεως ἀγαθῆς 
’ 3 fa! “ 
ἐπερώτημα εἰς θεόν, δι᾿ ἀναστάσεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, 
90 > > a an θ \ > > \ ¢ 
ὃς ἐστιν EN δεξιὰ BEOY πορευθεὶς εἰς οὐρανὸν ὑποτα- 
γέντων αὐτῷ ἀγγέλων καὶ ἐξουσιῶν καὶ δυνάμεων. 
4 'Xpicrod οὖν παθόντος σαρκὶ καὶ ὑμεῖς τὴν αὐτὴν 
» - e / vA ς \ \ / 
ἔννοιαν ὁπλίσασθε, OTL ὁ παθὼν σαρκὶ πέπαυται 
ς 4 > \ / ᾽ 6 / > θ / > \ 
ἁμαρτίαις, “εἰς TO μηκέτι ἀνθρώπων ἐπιθυμίαις ἀλλὰ 
θελήματι θεοῦ τὸν ἐπίλοιπον ἐν σαρκὶ βιῶσαι χρόνον. 
δάρκετὸς γὰρ ὁ παρεληλυθὼς χρόνος τὸ βούλημα τῶν 
a > 
ἐθνῶν κατειργάσθαι, πεπορευμένους ἐν ἀσελγείαις, 
7 
ἐπιθυμίαις, οἰνοφλυγίαις, κώμοις, πότοις, καὶ ἀθεμίτοις 
> / 42 / \ , 
εἰδωλολατρίαις. “ἐν ᾧ ξενίζονται μὴ συντρεχόντων 
« A 2 \ 3 \ lal > / BI , 
ὑμῶν εἰς τὴν αὐτὴν τῆς ἀσωτίας avayvow, Bracdn- 
a A x ‘4 
μοῦντες" ot ἀποδώσουσιν λόγον τῷ ἑτοίμως κρίνοντι 
ζῶντας καὶ νεκρούς" Seis τοῦτο γὰρ καὶ νεκροῖς evnyye- 


δ 1] TIETPOY A 7 





λίσθη ἵνα κριθῶσι μὲν κατὰ ἀνθρώπους σαρκὶ ζῶσι δὲ 
κατὰ θεὸν πνεύματι. a 

"Tlavrwv δὲ τὸ τέλος ἤγγικεν. σωφρονήσατε οὗν 
καὶ νήψατε εἰς προσευχάς" Sapo πάντων τὴν εἰς 
ἑαυτοὺς ἀγάπην ἐκτενῆ ἔχοντες, ὅτε ἀΙΓΑΠΗ κΑλΥΠΤΕι 
πλῆθος ἁμδρτιῶν: ϑφιλόξενοι εἰς ἀλλήλους ἄνευ 
γογγυσμοῦ: ἕκαστος καθὼς ἔλαβεν χάρισμα, εἰς 
ἑαυτοὺς αὐτὸ διακονοῦντες ὡς καλοὶ οἰκονόμοι ποικίλης 
χάριτος θεοῦ" Mei τις λαλεῖ, ὡς λόγια θεοῦ" εἴ τις 
διακονεῖ, ὡς ἐξ ἰσχύος ἧς χορηγεῖ ὁ θεός" ἵνα ἐν πᾶσιν 
δοξάζηται ὁ θεὸς διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ᾧ ἐστὶν ἡ δόξα 
καὶ τὸ κράτος εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων" ἀμήν. 


2° Αγαπητοί, μὴ ξενίζεσθε τῇ ἐν ὑμῖν πυρώσει πρὸς 
a δ) a 

πειρασμὸν ὑμῖν γινομένῃ ws ξένου ὑμῖν συμβαίνοντος, 

13 3 \ θὸ a a a +4 A θ 
ἀλλὰ καθὸ κοινωνεῖτε τοῖς τοῦ Χριστοῦ παθήμασιν 
7, “ Ν > a > 4 a 86 ? a 
χαίρετε, ἵνα καὶ ἐν τῇ ἀποκαλύψει τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ 

n > / 14 > > , > > / 
χαρῆτε ἀγαλλιώμενοι. €L Ονειδιζεοθε ἐν ὀνόματι 
Χριοτοῦ, μακάριοι, ὅτι τὸ τῆς δόξης καὶ τὸ TOY θεοῦ 

μ 
TINEYMA ἐφ᾽ ὑμᾶς δνάπόγετὰ. un γάρ τις ὑμῶν 
πασχέτω ὡς φονεὺς ἢ κλέπτης ἢ κακοποιὸς ἢ ὡς 
ἀλχλοτριεπίσκοπος" Mei δὲ ὡς Χριστιανός, μὴ ai- 
/ 7 \ \ \ > Ἄν 4.0 t ͵7 

σχυνέσθω, δοξαζέτω δὲ τὸν θεὸν ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι τούτῳ. 
ότι [0] καιρὸς τοῦ ἄρξδοθδι τὸ κρίμα ἀπὸ TOY οἴκογ τοῦ 
θεοῦ: εἰ δὲ πρῶτον ad ἡμῶν, τί τὸ τέλος τῶν 

> θ 4 “Ὁ “ a 3 / 18 \ σὴ = ' 
ἀπειθούντων τῷ τοῦ θεοῦ εὐαγγελίῳ ; Bal εἰ ὁ λίκδιος 
MOAIC οὦζετδι, ᾧ [Aé] aceBHC Kal AMapTMAOC ποῦ φὰνεῖτδι; 
19 “ ee ees en a, ~ a An 
ὥστε καὶ οἱ πάσχοντες κατὰ TO θέλημα τοῦ θεοῦ πιστῷ 

/ : / \ \ > 3 / 

κτίστῃ παρατιθέσθωσαν Tas ψυχὰς ἐν ἀγαθοποιίᾳ. 

5 1Π , 5 3 er rare 
peaButépous οὖν ἐν ὑμῖν παρακαλῶ ὁ συν- 
“πρεσβύτερος καὶ μάρτυς τῶν τοῦ Χριστοῦ παθημάτων, 


8 METPOY A [5 1—14 





ς ΣΝ 
ὁ καὶ τῆς μελλούσης ἀποκαλύπτεσθαι δόξης κοινωνός, 
Ξποιμάνατε τὸ ἐν ὑμῖν ποίμνιον τοῦ θεοῦ, μὴ ἀνωαγκαστῶς 
ἀλλὰ ἑκουσίως, μηδὲ αἰσχροκερδῶς ἀλλὰ προθύμως, 
8 δ᾽ e 4 n / 3 \ / 
μηὸ ὡς κατακυριεύοντες τῶν κλήρων ἀλλὰ τῦποι 
γινόμενοι τοῦ ποιμνίου" “καὶ φανερωθέντος τοῦ ἀρχι- 
ποίμενος κομιεῖσθε τὸν ἀμαράντινον τῆς δόξης στέφανον. 
δΟ / 4 ς 4 / Ul / 

μοίως, νεώτεροι, ὑποτάγητε πρεσβυτέροις. Ἰ]άντες 
δὲ ἀλλήλοις τὴν ταπεινοφροσύνην ἐγκομβώσασθε, ὅτι 
[6] θεὸς ὑπερηφάνοις ANTITACCETAI τὰπεινοῖς δὲ δίδωσιν 
YAPIN. 

ὁΤαπεινώθητε οὖν ὑπὸ τὴ ἣν χεῖ ῦ θεοῦ 

NTE οὖν ὑπὸ τὴν κραταιὰν χεῖρα τοῦ θεοῦ, 

ἵνα ὑμᾶς ὑψώσῃ ἐν καιρῷ, πᾶσαν THN MEPIMNAN ὑμῶν 
ἐπιρίψαντες ἐπ αὐτόν, OTL αὐτῷ μέλει περὶ ὑμῶν. 
διΙΝήψατε, γρηγορήσατε. ὁ ἀντίδικος ὑμῶν διάβολος 
ὡς λέων ὠρυόμενος περιπατεῖ ζητῶν καταπιεῖν" ὃ ᾧ 
ἀντίστητε στερεοὶ τῇ πίστει, εἰδότες τὰ αὐτὰ τῶν 
παθημά ἢ ἐν τῷ KO ἡμῶν ἀδελφό 

μάτων τῇ ἐν τῷ κοσμῷ ὑμῶν ἀδελφότητι ἐπιτε- 
λεῖσθαι. 1°O δὲ θεὸς πάσης χάριτος, ὁ καλέσας ὑμᾶς 

3 Ἁ ee 3 a > a xy / 

εἰς τὴν αἰώνιον αὐτοῦ δόξαν ἐν Χριστῷ, ὀλίγον 
παθόντας αὐτὸς καταρτίσει, στηρίξει, σθενώσει. 
Ἡαὐτῷ τὸ κράτος εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας" ἀμήν. 

Διὰ Σιλουανοῦ ὑμῖν τοῦ πιστοῦ ἀδελφοῦ, ὡς 
λογίζομαι, δι᾿ ὀλίγων ἔγραψα, παρακαλῶν καὶ ἐπιμαρ- 
τυρῶν ταύτην εἶναι ἀληθῆ χάριν τοῦ θεοῦ' εἰς ἣν στῆτε. 
1’ Ασπάζεται ὑμᾶς ἡ ἐν Βαβυλῶνι συνεκλεκτὴ καὶ 
Μάρκος ὁ υἱός pov. “Aocmdcacbe ἀλλήλους ἐν 

> 
φιλήματι ἀγάπης. 
3 / c An a a > [4] 

Εἰρήνη ὑμῖν πᾶσιν τοῖς ἐν Χριστῷ. 


nnd 


NOTES 


CHAPTER I 


i. 1—2. SawLvuTATION. 


1 I, Peter, am writing this letter as the commissioned Apostle of 
Jesus Christ and you, my readers in various Roman provinces of 
Asia Minor are God’s chosen people, the new Israel of God, although 
(like the Jews of the Dispersion) you seem to be strangers in a foreign 

2 land. Mycommission as an Apostle and your position as members of 
the chosen people are not the result of chance. They are based upon 
the fact that God, our Father, from the first contemplated us as His 
children and His agents, and He effected His purpose for us by conse- 
crating us to His service by the Holy Spirit, pledging us to obedience 
(like Israel at Sinai) as sprinkled with the blood of the covenant 
victim, Jesus Christ. 

May God’s gifts of favour and peace be increased by all that you 
have to undergo. 

. The salutation closely resembles the salutations of St Paul’s 
epistles and is probably formed after their model. It designates the 
writer and his authority, the readers and their privileges, and in- 
dicates one of the leading thoughts of the Epistle that Christians 
were set apart by God’s foreknowledge to be His chosen people, 
consecrated for a priestly life of sacrifice as covenanted members of 
Christ. 

1. Πέτρος. His old name Simon is only used in narrative pas- 
sages before his call as an Apostle, but our Lord afterwards addressed 
him as Simon, Simon Bar Jona, or Simon son of John, and St James 
in his speech at the Apostolic Conference, Acts xv. 14, speaks of him 
as Συμεών. In St John’s Gospel he is called Simon Peter 17 times 
and Peter 15 times, but in the other Gospels and in Acts Peter, the 
Greek form of the name given to him by our Lord, seems to have 
been his regular title. In 2 Pet. however the salutation is given in 
the name Συμεὼν Πέτρος. The Aramaic form Κηφᾶς, which occurs in 
1 Cor. and Gal., may- possibly be employed by St Paul because it 

“was used by the Judaizing party against whom he was writing. 


to I PETER (14 — 


ἀπόστολος ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ occurs in seven of St Paul’s Epistles 
as an assertion of his authority in writing. So here St Peter states 
his authority for addressing churches with which he had little, if any, 
personal connexion. 

The full name Jesus Christ is extremely rare in the Gospels and 
only occurs in the opening verses of Matt. and Mk, twice in Jn, i. 17 
and xvii. 3, and in the best text of Matt. xvi. 21, just after St Peter’s 
confession of Jesus as the Christ, when our Lord began a new stage 
in His teaching and as the Christ announced His Passion. In 
the Acts and Epistles Jesus Christ becomes a regular proper name, 
while Christ Jesus is a kind of confession of faith. 

ἐκλεκτοῖς παρεπιδήμοις διασπορᾶςΞ. The word διασπορά occurs 
first in the LXX. of Deut. xxviii. 25 describing the scattering of 
Israel if they are disobedient to God, and it is occasionally used in 
the later books of the O.T. In the N.T. it only occurs twice elsewhere, 
Jn vii. 35, “Will he go unto the Dispersion among the Greeks?” 
Jas. i. 1, “Τὸ the twelve tribes which are of the Dispersion.” In 
both these passages the word is generally supposed to refer to the 
Jewish Dispersion (but see Introduction, p. liiif.). So here some com- 
mentators would interpret the phrase literaliy and regard St Peter as 
addressing Jewish Christians only. But many passages in the Epistle 
(see Introduction) imply that the majority of the readers had been 
heathen, though in many towns it is morally certain that the nucleus 
of the Christian congregation would be derived from the Jewish 
congregation, as we find in St Paul’s missionary work. St Peter 
however does not merely mean scattered strangers, but uses the word 
διασπορά deliberately. Salmon suggests that it means ‘‘members of 
the Roman Church whom Nero’s persecution had dispersed to seek 
safety in the provinces.” Ramsay, who dates the Epistle as late as 
80 a.p., finds a reference to the Fall of Jerusalem which left the 
Church a ‘‘dispersed”’ body with no recognized centre. More prob- 
ably the word is used metaphorically, not merely in the sense that 
Christians are a scattered body of sojourners in the world, but one of 
the titles of the old Israel is transferred to the Church, the new Israel 
of God. Just as the Jewish Dispersion served to spread the know- 
ledge of Jehovah more widely, so the Christian Church scattered far 
and wide is the new “Dispersion” and has a similar work to do for 
God in the heathen world around. So elsewhere in the Epistle 
St Peter constantly applies to the Christian Church titles which 
originally belonged to the Jewish nation. 

ἐκλεκτοῖς. In the O.T. divine ‘‘ Election” is spoken of (a) in the 
choice of Israel as a nation, (Ὁ) in the choice of individual Israelites 


1 1] NOTES Il 


to perform special functions for Israel, e.g. Abraham, Moses, Saul, 
David, Solomon, Zerubbabel, the tribe of Judah, or for priestly work, 
Aaron and the Levites. In each case the choosing by God was not a 
reward. It was not an act of favouritism on God’s part. Those 
chosen were selected not for their own sake or to the exclusion 
or ‘‘reprobation” of others, but to do some special work for God, 
and if they were untrue to their mission they would forfeit their 
position. Here St Peter probably means that the Church is the 
new Israel of God, ‘‘a chosen people.” As a corporate body the 
Church is chosen ‘“‘ to tell forth God’s excellencies”’ and to complete 
the work of Christ her Head, but every member of that body has his 
own work to do and was chosen by God for that work. To have been 
thus chosen by God is not a guarantee of final salvation unless those 
chosen are faithful to their position. But to be one of ‘the elect 
people of God” is a ‘‘ state of salvation,” to which we are brought by 
God and not by chance, and we must pray for ‘‘ grace to continue in 
the same unto our life’s end.” ᾿ 

παρεπιδήμοις, cf. ii. 11. In one sense St Peter’s readers were 
sojourners because they lived among heathen. In another sense all 
Christians are in this world merely sojourners whose home is in 
heaven. 

Pontus, etc. It is generally admitted that the names are used in 
their imperial sense as denoting Roman provinces and not in the 
popular or geographical sense. The order in which the various pro- 
vinces are mentioned affords no clue to the place of writing. On the 
one hand Pontus is in the ΕἸ. and therefore nearly the last in geo- 
graphical order from Rome, but on the other hand it is in the N. and. 
therefore not the first in geographical order from Babylon. Again, 
Pontus and Bithynia formed one Roman province, therefore there 
must be some reason for their being named separately first and last 
in the list. Probably the provinces are named in the order in which 
Silvanus was expected to visit them, landing perhaps at Sinope in 
Pontus and making a circuit round to the coast of the Euxine again 
somewhere in Bithynia. 

The provinces named include all Asia Minor north of the Taurus 
Mountains, which were a natural frontier shutting off the provinces 
of the south coast. 

Pontus. The old kingdom of Pontus was conquered by Rome 
in 65 B.c., when Pompey defeated Mithridates and the maritime 
district of the Euxine W. of the Halys was joined to the recently 
formed province of Bithynia, a further strip of coast to the E. being 
added about 100 years later. The rest of the districts remained 


12 I PETER (1 1— 


independent for a time but were afterwards incorporated in the Roman 
province of Galatia, and early in the 2nd century were transferred to 
Cappadocia. The chief towns of Provincial Pontus along the coast 
from W. to E. were Heraclea, Amastris, Sinope and Amisos. All of 
these were thriving seaports with extensive commerce, the most 
important being Sinope, which was a Roman colony. In such centres 
of trade there were certain to be numerous Jewish settlers. In 
Acts ii. 9 we read that Jews from Pontus were present in Jerusalem 
on the day of Pentecost, and it is conceivable that the first knowledge 
of Christianity may have been introduced into Pontus by them. 
Again Aquila, who had married a Roman wife, Prisca or Priscilla, is 
described in Acts xviii. 2 as ‘‘a Jew, a man of Pontus by race,” and 
it is possible that he may have helped to evangelize his native country 
during his visits to the East. In any case there was constant com- 
mercial intercourse between Pontus and other centres of early 
Christianity, and the Church may well have been established in 
Pontus about the middle of the first century (though Ramsay, Ch, in 
Rom. Emp. p. 225, regards 65 a.p. as the earliest probable date). 

At any rate Pliny, the governor of Bithynia, writing apparently 
from Pontus to the Emperor Trajan about 112 a.p., speaks of many 
Christians of every age, every rank and of both sexes, not only in the 
towns but also in the villages and the country, through whom the 
temples had come to be well-nigh deserted and the sacred rites to be 
long suspended. This points to the fact that Christianity was of 
considerable standing in the district, and one suspected person who 
was examined declared that he had been a Christian but had aban- 
doned the faith 25 years previously. Sinope was the birthplace of 
Marcion, a semi-Gnostic teacher, who came to Rome in 140. He had 
been a wealthy shipowner and his father is described as a bishop. 

Galatia. The Roman province included all the central part of 
Asia Minor and extended from Pontus on the N. to the Taurus 
Mountains on the S. It embraced Paphlagonia, part of the old 
kingdom of Pontus, part of Phrygia including Antioch and Iconium, 
and part of Lycaonia including Lystra and Derbe, but it derived its 
name from the north central district, Galatia Proper, which had been 
occupied by Gaulish immigrants in the 3rd century B.c. They were 
conquered by the Romans under Manlius in 189 8,0. but retained 
semi-independence until 25 3.c., when Galatia Proper was made a 
Roman province. The chief towns in this district were Ancyra, 
Pessinus and Tavium. The southern part of the Roman province of 
Galatia was certainly evangelized by St Paul during his first missionary 
journey. Lightfoot and others hold that St Paul also visited Galatia 


11) NOTES 13 


Proper on his second and third journeys, and that the Epistle to the 
Galatians was addressed to that district, but Ramsay maintains that 
St Paul only wrote to the churches of the southern part of the Roman 
province of Galatia and never visited the northern district at all. 

Cappadocia was the district east of Galatia and came into the 
possession of the Romans in 17 a.p., but it was treated as an unim- 
portant frontier district, governed only by a procurator until 70 a.p. 
when it was considerably enlarged and made a regular province under 
a pro-praetor. From 76—106 it was under the same governor as 
Galatia, though otherwise the two provinces were distinct. The fact 
that it is here mentioned as if it was an important province has been 
urged as a slight argument in favour of dating the Epistle after 70 a.p., 
but if Silvanus was to visit this district it is difficult to see by what 
other name than Cappadocia it could be designated. Jews from 
Cappadocia were present on the day of Pentecost. Otherwise nothing 
is known of the introduction of Christianity there, but Caesareia, the 
chief town of Cappadocia, was on the great trade-routes from Syrian 
Antioch to the Black Sea and from Ephesus to the East. 

Asia. The Roman province included all Asia Minor west of 
Galatia, the capital being Ephesus. St Paul had been forbidden by 
the Spirit to preach there on his second missionary journey (Acts 
xvi. 6), but stayed in Ephesus for three years during his third 
journey, ‘‘so that all they which dwelt in Asia heard the word of the 
Lord both Jews and Greeks” (Acts xix. 10). Several of St Paul’s 
Epistles were addressed to this district, the Epistle to the Ephesians 
being almost certainly a circular letter to be passed on from Ephesus 
to the churches of the Lycus valley. The Epistles to the Colossians 
and to Philemon imply the existence of a considerable Christian body 
in Colossae, Laodicea and Hierapolis, though St Paul had apparently 
never visited those places in person (Col. ii. 1). The two Epistles to 
Timothy contain directions to him as head of the Church in Ephesus. 
Ephesus was also the home of St John in his later years; there his 
Gospel and Epistles were probably written and the letters to the 
Seven Churches in the Apocalypse are addressed to that district. In 
the beginning of the 2nd century the letters of Ignatius are addressed 
chiefly to churches of Asia and imply a developed organization with 
bishops, presbyters and deacons; while Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna, 
who was martyred at the age of 86 in 155—156 a.p., is another link 
with the Apostolic age. 

Bithynia had been bequeathed to the Romans by its last king, 
- Nicomedes ITI, in 74 B.c., and was joined with Pontus and formed 
into a united province by Pompey in 658.0. St Paul attempted to 


14 I PETER [1 1— 


enter Bithynia when precluded from preaching in Asia on his second 
missionary journey, but “the Spirit of Jesus suffered them not” 
(Acts xvi. 7). We have no evidence to shew how Christianity was 
introduced there, but there were two great roads connecting its chief 
towns Nicaea and Nicomedia with Antioch in Pisidia in the 5. and 
Ancyra and Syria in the E. 

2. This verse probably refers both to St Peter’s own position 
as an apostle of Jesus Christ and to that of his readers as the 
‘*chosen”’ people of God. Just as in Rom. i. 1, 6,7, St Paul couples 
himself and his readers together, he himself being ‘‘ called to be an 
apostle” (κλητὸς ἀπόστολος) and they “called to be saints” (κλητοῖς 
ἁγίοις), so here St Peter regards both his own choice to be an apostle 
and that of his readers to be the new Israel of God as being due to a 
divine purpose. The verse seems certainly to describe the opera- 
tion of the three Persons in the Trinity in fitting men to be God’s 
fellow-workers in the world. The Father in His eternal knowledge 
contemplates them as His chosen agents, the Holy Spirit consecrates 
and hallows them continuously for their work, which is to obey God’s 
will as covenanted members of Jesus Christ His Son, by whose blood 
as the true covenant victim they are sprinkled. For other passages 
where the threefold name is similarly introduced cf. 1 Cor. xii. 4—6; 
2 Cor. xiii. 18; Eph. iv. 4—6; 2 Thess. ii. 13—14; Titus iii. 4—6; 
Rom. viii. 16—17. 

The occurrence of such passages presupposes a recognized, although 
still unformulated, belief in the Holy Trinity, which can hardly have 
originated without some authoritative utterance of our Lord such as 
the great commission to baptize in the name of the Father, Son and 
Holy Ghost in Matt. xxviii. 19, or the discourse recorded in Jn xiv. 

The three clauses κατὰ, ἐν, εἰς, may be taken either as parallel to each 
other as denoting three different aspects of the divine choice, ascribed 
to the three Persons in the Holy Trinity, or more probably as succes- 
sive stages, each dependent upon the preceding: κατὰ, the standard 
of God’s eternal design; ἐν, the means by which it is worked out; 
εἰς, the aim of that design. 

The ‘‘call” to a position of privilege and therefore of service is 
a ‘*link in the chain of providential care which began in the eternal 
loving purpose of God.” This thought is elaborated in fuller detail in 
Rom, viii. 28—30. 

It is however somewhat remarkable that St Paul nowhere refers to 
“the blood of sprinkling.” 

κατὰ πρόγνωσιν. The substantive does not occur in the LXX. 
except in the Apocrypha. In the N.T. it only occurs again in St 


1 2] NOTES Is 


Peter’s speech on the day of Pentecost (Acts ii. 23) that Jesus was 
** delivered up by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God.” 
The verb is used of men ‘‘ knowing beforehand” (Acts xxvi. 5; 2 Pet. 
iii. 17), but in Rom. viii. 29 it is used of God ‘‘ foreknowing ” certain 
persons whom He also predestinated and called; in Rom. xi. 2 it is 
used of the ‘“‘ people whom God foreknew”’ as not being cast away by 
God despite appearances, and in 1 Pet. i. 20 it is used of Christ as the 
true paschal lamb ‘‘foreknown before the foundation of the world.” 
So here St Peter regards God as having from the first contemplated 
certain individuals like himself and a society or ‘‘ chosen people ” like 
his readers to carry on the work of Israel as His agents in the world. 
Cf. Is. xlix. 1 and Jer. i. 5, ‘‘ Before I formed thee in the belly 
I knew thee...I sanctified thee. I have appointed thee a prophet unto 
the nations.” 

θεοῦ πατρός. Θεός is never a mere proper name in the N.T. but 
denotes the power, supremacy, authorship and superintendence of 
God. πατήρ is frequently used to describe God as the Father of our 
Lord Jesus Christ, but also of God as “‘ our Father.’”’ Sometimes (as 
probably here) the two ideas are coupled together because it is only as 
‘*a member of Christ” that a man becomes ‘‘ the child of God” in 
the highest sense. So our Lord spoke to His disciples of going to 
‘*My Father and your Father,” and in Romans viii. 29 St Paul says 
that God’s object in choosing men ‘‘ to be conformed to the image of 
his Son” was ‘‘ that He might be the first-born among many brethren.” 

ἐν ἁγιασμῷ πνεύματος might mean by the hallowing of our human 
spirit, but the context implies that hallowing by the Holy Spirit is 
intended. This is the process in which God’s choice takes effect in 
the equipment of His agents. The root (ay-), see note v. 15, means to 
set apart, so to consecrate. Apostles, prophets and every member of 
the chosen people need a life-long hallowing for their special office. 
As applied to the whole body of Christians cf. 2 Thess. ii. 13, “" God 
chose you from the beginning unto salvation, ἐν ἁγιασμῷ πνεύματος, 
from which passage St Peter may perhaps be borrowing. 

els ὑπακοήν K.t.A. This choosing by God, this hallowing process 
employed upon those chosen, is intended to result in (eis) their 
obedience. Unless they fulfil that divine purpose, to have been 
**known by God” will only increase their guilt. Cf. Amos iii. 2, 
“You only have I known of all the families of the earth: therefore 
I will visit upon you all your iniquities.” 

ῥαντισμὸν atparos. The only instances where persons were 
. sprinkled with blood in the O.T. were (a) the sprinkling of a leper 
with the blood of a bird, Lev. xiv. 6, 7; (b) the sprinkling of Aaron 


16 I PETER fla 


and his sons with the blood of a ram to consecrate them for their 
priestly work (Ex. xxix. 21; Lev. viii. 80); (6) the sprinkling of 
the people by Moses at Sinai when the covenant between God and 
Israel was ratified (Ex. xxiv. 3—8). It is possible that St Peter may 
be referring to the second of these as he does elsewhere describe his 
readers as a body of priests to offer up spiritual sacrifices, and this 
idea seems to be referred to also in Heb. x. 22, where Christians 
having access into the Holy of Holies in the blood of Jesus, their great 
High Priest, are bidden themselves to ‘‘ draw near’’ as priests whose 
hearts are sprinkled and their bodies bathed with pure water, just as 
the High Priest was sprinkled with blood at his consecration and 
also bathed before the day of Atonement. According to Hort (1 Pet., 
p. 23), however, the reference here is to the sprinkling of the whole 
people at Sinai. Moses proclaimed to the people all the words of 
Jehovah and all the judgments, and they promise obedience. Then 
to make it a binding covenant an altar is built and victims are killed 
by representatives of each tribe. Half of the blood is poured upon 
the altar as representing Jehovah, while the other half is sprinkled 
upon the people as the other contracting party in the covenant. The 
people, having heard the Book of the Covenant read, promise “ All 
that Jehovah hath spoken will we do and be obedient,” and the 
blood is described as the ““ blood of the covenant.” This ceremony 
is referred to in Heb. ix. 7, 11—22, where it is contrasted with 
the new covenant of which Jesus is at once the mediator and the 
covenant victim. The blood once shed upon the altar of the cross as 
the pledge of God’s share in the covenant is also sprinkled upon the 
people as the pledge of their share in it. Cf. also Heb. xii. 24. 

The same idea is also suggested by our Lord’s words in instituting 
the Sacrament of His Body and Blood, ‘‘This is My Blood of the 
Covenant” or ‘‘the new Covenant in My Blood.” It is not only a 
continual remembrance of the sacrifice of the death of Christ, of the 
blood outpoured upon the altar of the Cross and accepted by God as 
the pledge of His share in the Covenant as promising pardon, but it 
also assures us that we are the covenanted people of God, ‘‘ very 
members incorporate in...the blessed company of all faithful people’’ 
and as such pledged to obedience. ; 

Dr Chase (Hastings, D. of B. m1. 794) on the other hand argues 
that the preposition εἰς, following as it does the ἐν ἁγιασμῷ, must 
point to the goal of God’s divine purpose and not to the initial pledge 
of obedience, when the Christian is first admitted into the new covenant 
by the initial sprinkling of blood. He therefore suggests a reference 
to the sprinkling with water (Num. xix. 9, 13, 20f.) by which a 


1 3] NOTES 17 


faithful Israelite, defiled by contact with a dead body, was sprinkled 
with the water of separation. So the blood of Christ can purge the 
conscience of the obedient Christian from dead works (Heb. ix. 14); 
ef. also 1 Jn i. 7, ‘‘If we walk in the light...the blood of Jesus 
cleanseth us from all sin.” In answer to this it may be urged that 
initiation into the covenant points forward to a life of obedience as 
its goal, and to be sprinkled with the blood of Christ, the covenant 
victim, is not only an initial means of admission but also a source of 
continuous cleansing in which ‘‘our souls are washed through His 
most precious blood.” Again it also pledges us to share the sacrificial 
life of Christ by ‘ presenting ourselves, our souls and bodies as a 
living sacrifice” to God. Just as in Baptism we are signed with the 
Cross not merely as a rite of initiation but as a token that we must 
share Christ’s Cross and fight manfully under His banner, so to be 
admitted into fellowship with Christ by the blood of sprinkling 
involves fellowship with His sufferings, and this idea would have 
special force for St Peter’s readers who were face to face with 
persecution (cf. 2 Cor. i. 5; Phil. iii. 10, ete.). 

χάρις ὑμῖν καὶ εἰρήνη. This is St Paul’s regular greeting except 
in 1 and 2 Tim. where ἔλεος is added. Some would regard it as 
a combination of the Greek greeting χαίρειν and the Hebrew greeting 
pide’ = peace, but more probably it represents the old priestly blessing 
(Num. vi. 24), ‘‘The Lord be gracious to thee...and give thee peace.” 

πληθυνθείη is perhaps borrowed from ‘Peace be multiplied to 
you,” Dan. iv. 1, vi. 25, In the N.T.it occurs again in the salutation 
in 2 Pet. and Jude. St Peter asks that the trials through which his 
readers have to pass may only increase God’s gifts of grace and peace. 


i. 3—13. Tur Hien Privineces ΑΝῸ DEsTINy OF THE CHRISTIAN. 
Benediction. 


3 ‘Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, for by 
raising Him from the dead He has begotten us, His other children, to 
4 a new life of hope which is directed towards an inheritance which, 
unlike Canaan, can never be ravaged, never be defiled, never fade. 
It is an inheritance which in God’s eternal purpose was all through 
the ages designed to be extended to you Gentiles (εἰς ὑμᾶς) and has 
been reserved in heaven for that purpose. (The present realization 
of that inheritance may seem strangely to belie that hope, for you are 
5-beset by dangers and trials of all kinds), but you are under the watch 
and ward of God’s almighty power if only you have faith to avail 


I PETER B 


18 I PETER [13— 


yourselves of the deliverance (from all evil) which (like the inheritance) 
was ready prepared to be revealed in the ‘‘last time,” i.e. the Mes- 


6 sianic age which has already begun. Living in that age as you do, 


you can exult, even though for the time being God may require you 


7 to experience sorrow in all kinds of trials, in order that the genuine- 


ness of your faith (a far more precious genuineness than that of gold, 
which is only a perishable substance though trial by fire is employed 
even for its testing) may be discovered by the Divine Refiner, thereby 
redounding unto praise and glory and honour for you (and conse- 
quently to Himself as perfected in His creatures) in the revelation 


8 of Jesus Christ. True you never saw Him in the flesh (as I did) 


yet you love Him, and, though you cannot now see Him, yet, 
believing on Him as you do, you exult with a joy too deep for 


9 words and already irradiated with heavenly glory, receiving the long- 


10 


11 


12 


promised end of such faith, namely, the deliverance from evil of your 
true selves. 

I said that the deliverance was ready prepared, and.so it was. 
The deliverance now revealed to you was spoken of by the prophets, 
who prophesied about the extension of God’s favour to you Gentiles, 
They sought and searched diligently to discover what or at any 
rate what kind of time the Spirit of the Lord’s Anointed which was 
in them signified when it solemnly declared beforehand in God’s 
name the sufferings destined for the Messiah and the glories which 
were to follow those sufferings; and it was revealed to them that it 
was not for their own age but for you that they were ministering the 
messages (of deliverance) which were now openly announced to you 
by those who brought you good tidings by the Mission of the Holy 
Spirit from heaven; and this unfolding of God’s loving purpose for 
His creatures is watched with wondering eyes by angels. 

The whole passage is an expansion of ἐκλεκτοῖς κατὰ πρόγνωσιν 
θεοῦ in the salutation, and is intended to shew that the choosing of 
the Gentiles was no afterthought but part of God’s eternal purpose. 
It has striking similarities with Eph. iii. 5—12, where the mystery 
of Christ, not made known to other generations but kept secret 
in God, is described as being now revealed by the Spirit to the 
apostles and prophets, namely that the Gentiles are fellow-heirs with 
Israel, and the Church (as the new and world-wide Israel) is the 
means of making known to angelic beings the manifold wisdom of 
God in planning the course of the ages. 

The three clauses εἰς ἐλπίδα ζῶσαν, els κληρονομίαν, els σωτηρίαν, 
might (i) be all taken as dependent directly upon ἀναγεννήσας, meaning 
that the new life is at once a hope, an inheritance, and a state of 


1 3] NOTES 19 


salvation ; or (ii) the second and third clauses might be taken as 
expansions of ἐλπίδα. It is a hope.which is directed towards (els) an 
inheritance and a deliverance which are already partially realized 
but not yet consummated; or (iii) as suggested in the paraphrase εἰς 
κληρονομίαν may be the goal of ἐλπὶς and εἰς σωτηρίαν of πίστις. So 
v. 9, σωτηρία is described as τὸ τέλος τῆς πίστεως. Again πίστις and 
ἐλπὶς are coordinated in v. 21, where St Peter repeats all the leading 
ideas of the earlier section, προεγνωσμένου... φανερωθέντος ἐπ᾽ ἐσχάτου 
τῶν χρόνων δι’ ὑμᾶς, deliverance (σωτηρία) being now expressed by 
ἐλυτρώθητε, while the promise of “inheritance” in Canaan once given 
by the prophet to the exiles in Babylon is described as good tidings 
now extended to the Gentiles (εἰς buds). 

8. εὐλογητός, worthy to receive blessing is nearly always restricted 
to God in the LXX. while εὐλογημένος, one who receives blessing, is 
used of men. The same form of benediction occurs in Eph. i. 3 and 
2 Cor. i. 3. 

ὁ θεὸς Kal πατὴρ τοῦ κυρίου x.r.A. The words are used in the 
same sense in which our Lord said to Mary Magdalene, ‘‘I go to My 
Father and your Father, to My God and your God,” and again on the 
cross He cried, ‘‘My God, My God,” but this must not be exaggerated 
into implying that the Son was Himself a creature as the Arians 
taught. 

κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ. St Peter in his speech on the day 
of Pentecost shewed from prophecy as fulfilled in the resurrection 
and ascension that God had made Jesus both Lord and Christ, and it 
seems to have been the earliest and simplest form of Christian creed 
to say ‘‘Jesus is Lord” or “‘Jesus Christ is Lord.” St Peter couples 
himself with his readers and shews that Jewish and Gentile Christians 
are one as owning the same Lord. 

ἔλεος is specially used of God’s mercy in admitting Gentiles to the 
covenant, cf. Rom. xi. 30—32, xv. 9; Eph. ii. 1—4. 

dvayevvyoas. The word occurs nowhere else in the Greek Bible 
except in v. 23, and as a Western reading in Jn iii. 5, where in 
the preceding passage our Lord had said γεννηθῇ ἄνωθεν. St Paul 
describes those who are in Christ as καινὴ κτίσις (2 Cor. v. 17), and in 
Titus iii. 5 he speaks of the “laver of regeneration” (radvyyevecta). 

St Peter regards the resurrection of Jesus as having ushered in a 
new life of hope for mankind, reversing the sentence of doom. As 
members of the Church of. Christ they enter into a new order of 
existence as children of God. 

ἐλπίδα ζῶσαν, as members of Christ we are here and now ‘‘in- 
heritors of the kingdom of heaven” but we are not yet in full 


B2 


20 I PETER ες 


possession of our inheritance, We have only the “earnest” or first 
instalment of it. But we have “the hope of glory” and this hope is 
not like the old Messianic hope of the Jews, which had become 
languid and conventional. Our hope is full of growth and vitality. 

4. εἰς κληρονομίαν. The goal to which our hope points forward 
is the spiritual Canaan, ‘‘the lot of our inheritance.” Unlike the 
earthly Canaan it can never be ravaged by hostile marauders (ἄφθαρ- 
tov) or polluted by heathen profanation (ἀμίαντον) nor scorched and 
withered (ἀμάραντον). 

κληρονομία in the O.T, denotes possession rather than heirship. 
‘« Originally (S. and H. Rom. p. 204) meaning (i) the simple possession 
of the Holy Land, it came to mean (ii) its permanent and assured 
possession (Ps. xxv. (xxiv.) 13; xxxvi. (xxxvii.) 9, 11, etc.); hence 
(iii) specially the secure possession won by the Messiah (Is. lx. 21; 
lxi. 7); and so it became a symbol of all Messianic blessings.” 

In the N.T. the subst. occurs 13 times and seems primarily to 
denote possession of an inheritance rather than heirship to a future 
inheritance. E.g. Acts vii. 5, God gave Abraham no κληρονομίαν, 
i.e. present possession in Canaan (but cf. Gal. iii, 18; Heb. xi. 8), 
Eph. i. 18, Christians are partakers of the κληρονομία of the Saints 
in light (i.e. fellow-citizens with the Saints). But as yet we only 
have an instalment (ἀῤῥαβὼν) of our full inheritance, Eph. i. 14; and 
in Col. iii. 24, ‘‘ the reward of the inheritance” is regarded as future. 

The verb κληρονομεῖν occurs 18 times, generally in the future, of 
inheriting (i.e. possessing) the earth, the Kingdom of God, or eternal 
life. In Matt. xxv. 24 it denotes entering into possession of the 
Kingdom. 

κληρονόμος occurs Evy. (3), St Paul (8), Heb. (3), Jas. (1), and 
sometimes includes the idea of heirship; but in Gal. iv. Christians 
are described as heirs who have come of age. 

In this passage therefore St Peter probably regards Christians as 
being already in partial possession of the inheritance so long reserved 
for them. ‘This idea is included in the statement of the Catechism, 
‘‘In my Baptism...1 was made...an inheritor of the Kingdom of 
Heaven.” 

τετηρημένην.. -φρουρουμένους. τηρεῖν is to watch or keep safe; 
φρουρεῖν to stand sentry over either to prevent escape, as in 2 Cor. xi. 
32 (where the parallel passage in Acts ix. 24 has παρατηρεῖν), or to 
guard against attack, protect. Cf. Phil. iv. 7; Gal. iii. 23. 

Here the perfect participle, τετηρημένην, means that the inherit- 
ance destined by God to be extended to the Gentiles (εἰς ὑμᾶς) has 
been safely laid by in reserve in heaven all through the long years of 


15] NOTES 21 


silence when God’s mercy in including the Gentiles in the covenant 
was not yet made known (cf. Rom. xvi. 25; Eph. iii. 5—11; 1 Pet. i. 
11—12). The present participle, φρουρουμένους, describes the present 
position of Christians as heirs who still need God’s constant protec- 
tion in order to attain to final salvation. 

ἐν οὐρανοῖς suggests another mark of superiority of the Christian’s 
inheritance as compared with the earthly Canaan. 

δ. ἐν δυνάμει θεοῦ may describe the fortress in which or the 
garrison by which the Christian is guarded. 

διὰ πίστεως. Faith in God’s promised deliverance is the condition 
by which man must avail himself of the divine protection. 

εἰς σωτηρίαν. It is simpler to connect the words with those which 
immediately precede them rather than with ἀναγεννήσας or ἐλπίδα. 
In this case they may be dependent on φρουρουμένους if σωτηρία is 
understood in the sense of final and completed deliverance. But the 
words which follow seem rather to regard the deliverance as some- 
thing which Christians are already receiving, something predicted 
by prophets but now proclaimed. It seems better therefore to couple 
διὰ πίστεως εἰς σωτηρίαν together. (For εἰς σωτηρίαν governed by a 
substantive cf. Rom. i. 16, δύναμις θεοῦ εἰς σωτηρίαν ; x. 1, δέησις els o.3 
2 Cor. vii. 10, μετάνοιαν εἰς σ.; and cf. Rom. x. 10, ὁμολογεῖται εἰς o.) 

σωτηρία (ὃ. and H. Rom. p. 23), ‘“* The fundamental idea con- 
tained in the word is the removal of dangers menacing to life and the 
consequent placing of life in conditions favourable to free and healthy 
expansion.” In the earlier books of the O.T. it denotes deliverance 
from physica] peril (Jud. xv. 18; 1 Sam. xi. 9, 13, ete.). But gradually 
it tended to be appropriated to the great deliverances of the nation, 
e.g. the Passage of the Red Sea (Ex. xiv. 13, etc.) and the Return 
from Exile (Is. xlv. 17, etc.). Thus by a natural transition it was 
associated with the Messianic deliverance in the lower forms of the 
Jewish Messianic expectation (Ps. Sol. x. 9, xii. 7; Test. XII. Patr. 
Sym. 7; Jud. 22; Benj. 9, 10) [the form used in all these passages 
is σωτήριον, cf. Lk. ii. 32]. In this sense of Messianic national 
deliverance it is used in Lk. i. 69, 71, 77. It was also associated with 
the higher form of the Christian hope, Acts iv. 12, xiii. 26, ete. 

In this latter sense σωτηρία covers the whole range of the Messianic 
deliverance both in its negative aspect as a rescuing from the wrath 
_ under which the whole world is lying and in its positive aspect as the 
imparting of “eternal life,” cf. 1 Thess. v.9, 10. The σωτηρία is not 
yet fully complete. Christians have to grow towards it (1 Pet. ii. 2), 
.to work it out (Phil. ii. 12), they may neglect it (Heb. ii. 3). It is 
nearer than it was when they first became believers(Rom. xiii.11), It is 


22 I PETER [1 5— 


to perfect our salvation that the Return of Christ is awaited (Heb. ix. 
28). But ‘‘now is the day of salvation” (2 Cor. vi. 2); the deliver- 
ance is already at work for those who have faith to accept it. They 
do here and now receive that deliverance of their true selves, their 
true lives (σωτηρίαν ψυχῶν), which is the goal of their faith. 

ἑτοίμην ἀποκαλυφθῆναι ἐν καιρῷ ἐσχάτῳ. Dr Chase (Hastings, 
D. of B. 111. 795) connects these words with κληρονομίαν, and inter- 
prets ἐν καιρῷ ἐσχάτῳ in the same sense as ἐπ᾽ ἐσχάτου τῶν χρόνων in 
i. 20 as referring to the Messianic age which is described in prophecy 
as “the last days” (15. ii. 2; Hos. iii. 5; Mic. iv. 1). The actual 
phrase, καιρὸς ἔσχατος, does not occur, but καιρὸς is used in eschato- 
logical passages in Daniel and in the N.T. (e.g. 1 Pet. iv. 17; Rev. i. 3). 
According to this interpretation the clause is correlative to τετηρημένην 
ἐν οὐρανοῖς. It is however more natural to take the clause with the 
immediately preceding word σωτηρίαν, in which case καιρῷ ἐσχάτῳ 
might mean either ‘‘ the last day”—or as Dr Hort would explain it— 
‘*a season of extremity,’’ ‘‘ when things are at their worst.’’ The phrase 
is so used in Classical writers (Polyb. xxrx. 11, 12; Plut. Syl. xm. 
458r). But there-is no instance in Biblical Greek of ἔσχατος in that 
sense, and neither of the two last interpretations make it reasonably 
possible to connect ἐν ᾧ ἀγαλλιᾶσθε with καιρῷ, which is grammatically 
the natural antecedent. It would involve taking ἀγαλλιᾶσθε either as 
an imperative or as a quasi future. 

But, if καιρῷ ἐσχάτῳ is taken in the sense of the Messianic age, the 
καιρός which the Prophets sought to ascertain (v. 11), the clause may 
still refer to σωτηρίαν if ἑτοίμην is understood as practically equivalent 
to ἡτοιμασμένην. This is virtually the purport of vv. 10, 11, and the 
clause thus becomes correlative to κληρονομίαν τετηρημένην and would 
mean that the σωτηρίαν, which the readers are described as already 
receiving, was all along in readiness to be revealed ‘‘ when the fulness 
of the time was come.” 

In any case ἑτοίμην means more than μέλλουσαν (v. 1). The 
thought that God’s plan of salvation was prepared beforehand as 
a new revelation to Gentiles as well as being the realization of Israel’s 
hopes occurs in Lk, ii. 30—32, τὸ σωτήριόν cov ὃ ἡτοίμασας.. «φῶς els 
ἀποκάλυψιν ἐθνῶν καὶ δόξαν λαοῦ cov ᾿Ισραήλ. 

6. ἐν ᾧ ἀγαλλιᾶσθε. Dr Hort, recognizing the difficulty of con- 
necting these words with καιρῷ ἐσχάτῳ in the sense of ‘‘ season of 
extremity,” would make ᾧ masculine—‘‘In whom,” i.e. Christ. This 
would match the following phrase: εἰς ὃν πιστεύοντες ἀγαλλιᾶτε. But 
if καιρῷ ἐσχάτῳ means the Messianic age in which the readers were 
living, ἐν g can be taken in its more obvious grammatical connexion 


17] NOTES 23 


and would mean ‘‘ living in that age as you do.” Another interpreta- 
tion would be to take ἐν @ as neuter (ef. 11, 12, iv. 4)= wherein, i.e. in 
the thought of your new birth and its privileges. 

ἀγαλλιᾶσθε must be taken as present indicative (not imperative) in 
view of the ἀγαλλιᾶτε in v. 8. The active only occurs again in Lk, i. 
47 and in Rev. xix. 7 (v.l.). Dr Hort suggests that the middle voice 
may here denote a state of exultation caused by God’s dealings, while 
the active regards exultation more as their own act. But a more 
usual distinction is that the middle denotes inward feeling and the 
active merely states a fact (e.g. ὑστερεῖν =to lack; ὑστερεῖσθαι:: ἴο feel 
a sense of want). 

ὀλίγον may mean either for a little time or to a small degree, ef. 
v. 10, ὀλέγον παθόντας. The relative shortness of their sufferings is 
perhaps only one feature of their slightness as compared with the 
glory which is to follow. 

ἄρτι =just for the moment. 

εἰ δέον may mean, seeing that such sufferings are part of the 
appointed order of things, ‘‘These things must come to pass” (Mk 
xiii. 7, etc.), or it may imply some uncertainty whether some of the 
readers at least may escape persecution; cf. iii. 17, εἰ θέλοι τὸ θέλημα 
τοῦ Θεοῦ. 

λυπηθέντες = ye have been put to grief. The word denotes not 
merely sufferings but the mental distress caused bythem. The aorist 
participle does not necessarily mean that the grief is ended before the 
exultation can begin. Christian exultation does not preclude the 
presence of sorrow, cf. 2 Cor. vi. 10, ‘‘ as sorrowful yet alway rejoicing.” 
Aorist’participles coupled with an aorist frequently denote an action 
contemporaneous with that of the verb, e.g. προσευξάμενοι εἶπον, Acts 
i. 24, and there is no reason why this should not be the case when 
they are coupled with a present tense, although the present participle 
is generally employed, but the aorist may have a summarizing force 
describing what may be a long continued experience as a single whole 
which has to be completed. 

ἐν ποικίλοις πειρασμοῖς = surrounded as you are by a variety of 
trials. The phrase, together with τὸ δοκίμιον ὑμῶν τῆς πίστεως, is 
borrowed from Jas. i. 2, 3. (See Introduction, p. lv.) 

7. τὸ δοκίμιον. It is commonly stated that τὸ δοκίμιον must be a 
substantive and is equivalent to δοκιμεῖον =a means of testing. It 
certainly has that meaning in Proverbs xxvii. 21, δοκίμιον ἀργυρίῳ 
καὶ χρυσῷ πύρωσις = fire is the test for silver and gold, from which 
.passage St Peter probably borrows the word πύρωσις in iv. 12. 

In Jas. i. 3, from which St Peter is probably borrowing, the 


24 I PETER [i 


meaning process of testing would give a good sense, but in St Peter the 
meaning required is the approved character which is the result of 
testing. Dr Hort therefore prefers the reading given in four cursive 
MSS. 25, ὅθ, 69, 110, τὸ δόκιμον (neuter adjective) = the approved 
element or genuineness of your faith—as opposed to spurious faith 
which proves to be dross. For such a construction οἵ, 2 Cor. viii. 8, 
τὸ THs ὑμετέρας ἀγάπης γνήσιον. But Deissmann, Bible Studies, 
pp. 259—262, shews that in the Fayyfim Papyrus .documents δοκίμιος 
or δοκιμεῖος occurs several times as an adjective applied to gold and 
was a recognized variant for δόκιμος (ef. ἐλευθέριος for ἐλεύθερος, καθάριος 
for καθαρός). He would therefore regard δοκίμιον as an adjective in 
Ps. xii. 6, τὰ λόγια κυρίου λόγια ἅγνα ἀργύριον πεπυρωμένον δοκίμιον 
τῇ Yn κεκαθαρισμένον ἑπταπλασίως = ‘the words of the Lord are pure 
words, genuine silver, purified by fire, seven times refined, for the 
land.” So in 1 Chron. xxix. 4, Zech. xi. 18, some MSS. of the LXX. 
read δοκιμίου, δοκίμιον or δοκίμειον for δοκίμου and δόκιμον. 

Arethas on Apoc. ix. 4 (Cramer Cat. p. 315) probably uses οἱ δὲ 
τὸ δοκίμιον ἑαυτῶν διὰ πυρὸς παρεχόμενοι to mean those who prove their 
genuineness. So Oecumenius interprets τὸ δοκίμιον as meaning τὸ 
κεκριμένον, τὸ δεδοκιμασμένον, τὸ καθαρόν. Probably therefore both in 
St Peter and in St James τὸ δοκίμιον is a neuter adjective and means 
proved genuineness. In this case the passage in St James is more 
closely allied to Rom. v. 4, but whereas St Paul regards patient 
endurance as productive of approved genuineness (δοκιμή), St James 
reverses the process and regards faith already tested and proved 
genuine as a ground for future endurance. 

χρυσίου τοῦ ἀπολλυμένου, i.e. gold, a property of which it is to 
perish. The meaning may be either: Gold, despite its perishable 
character, is not destroyed but only purified by the fire, so a fortiori 
your faith will survive and will only be purified by trials; or, If it is 
worth while to employ trial by fire to test a perishable substance 
like gold, a fortiori such a process may be employed to arrive at 
a far more valuable result, viz. to prove the purity of your faith. 
Therefore suffering is not a strange chance but part of God’s loving 
purpose (cf. iv. 12). 

εὑρεθῇ may be taken with εἰς ἔπαινον = result in praise, etc., or 
better with πολυτιμότερον. The purity of your faith discovered by 
this trial by fire is a far more valuable discovery than that of the 
purity of refined gold. The discovery is made by God as the refiner. 

ἔπαινον δόξαν τιμήν might refer either to men or to God, that 
those who emerge from the trial will receive praise, glory and honour 
from God, or that the approved character of His children will redound 


18] NOTES 25 


to God’s own glory. Possibly both ideas are included, for God is 
always glorified when men attain His loving purpose. 

ἐν ἀποκαλύψει ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ (objective genitive). The phrase is 
certainly sometimes used of the final revelation of Christ at the Second 
Advent (cf. 1 Cor. i. 7; 2 Thess. i. 7; and (?) Rev. i. 1). 

The absence of the article does not preclude the meaning ‘‘ the 
revelation of Jesus Christ,” because where the noun in the genitive is 
anarthrous the noun which governs it frequently becomes anarthrous 
also, e.g. θελήματι θεοῦ, iv. 2, but τὸ θέλημα τοῦ θεοῦ, iii. 17; ef. dv 
ἀναστάσεως I. X., i. 8; πρὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου, 1. 20. 

But that final revelation is only the climax of a long series of 
progressive revelations whenever Christ is revealed to or in any of His 
members (cf. 2 Cor. xii. 1; Gal. i. 12, 16; and (?) Rev. i. 1), and this 
thought is not excluded here though it culminates in the final revela- 
tion. So there are many ‘‘comings of the Son of Man” in various 
crises of history but all lead up to His final Coming. 

8. οὐκ ἰδόντες states a historical fact that they had not seen 
Christ in the flesh as St Peter himself had done (cf. Jn xx. 29). 

μὴ ὁρῶντες describes their present condition, though (for the 
present) you cannot see Him. No stress can be laid on the distinction 
between οὐ and μὴ, though some would explain μὴ as suggesting the 
mental condition of the readers. 

eis ὃν must be taken with πιστεύοντες. πιστεύειν εἰς is the com- 
monest construction in the N.T., and almost the only one used by 
St Peter and St John. It means faith which enters into union with 
Christ. 

ἀνεκλαλήτῳ occurs only here in the N.T., a joy which is too deep 
for utterance. 

δεδοξασμένῃ. The Christian’s joy even in the midst of sorrow is 
irradiated by the unseen glory of heaven. 


Suffering and Glory. 
δόξα (S. and H. Rom. p. 84). ‘‘There are two quite distinct mean- 
ings of this word. (1)=opinion (not in N.T.) and thence ‘ favourable 
opinion,’ ‘reputation’ (Jn xii. 43; Rom. ii. 7, 10, etc.). (2) As 
a LXX. translation of i123 it means: 
**(1) Visible brightness or splendour (Acts xxii. 11; 1 Cor, 
xv. 40). 
**(2) The brightness which radiates from the presence of God, 
e.g. at Sinai (Ex. xxiv. 16), the pillar of cloud (Ex. xvi. 10), or in the 
. Tabernacle or Temple (Ex. xl. 34; 1 Kings viii. 11), especially on the 
Mercy Seat (Ex, xxv. 22; so Rom. ix. 4). 


26 I PETER [1 8-- 


“(8) This visible splendour symbolized the divine perfections, 
the majesty or goodness of God as manifested to men (Lightfoot on 
Col. i. 11; ef. Eph. i. 6, 12, 17; iii. 16). 

“(4 These perfections are in a measure communicated to man 
through Christ (2 Cor. iii. 18; iv. 6). Both morally and physically 
a certain transfiguration takes place in the Christian partially here, 
completely hereafter.” 

The incarnate Christ was not only the revelation of God to man, 
He also revealed man to himself, shewing what God’s ideal for man 
is. Man was created to be the δόξα and εἰκὼν of God (1 Cor. xi. 7), 
but in his present condition man comes terribly far short of the glory 
intended for him by God (Rom. iii. 23). 

Although man was intended to be crowned with glory and honour 
(Ps. viii. 5) it is only in the person of Christ that this has been 
attained (Heb. ii. 9), ‘*‘In Him little by little under the conditions of 
human existence the absolute ideal of manhood was revealed.” So it 
is only ‘‘ Christ in us” which constitutes ‘‘the hope of glory,” the 
possibility of attaining the divine ideal for man (Col. i. 27), Jesus 
Christ is our glory (Jas. ii. 1). The revelation of the sons of God (as 
they were meant to be) for which the created universe waits is the 
revelation of the glory intended for us (Rom. viii. 18—21). 

But it was only through suffering that manhood in the person of 
Christ entered into glory. That was the pathway to glory indicated 

-in O.T. prophecy. In such descriptions as that of the Suffering 
Servant of the Lord the prophets were pointing to (els) Christ, 
describing sufferings destined for Him (ef. Acts ii. 25, Δαυὶδ λέγει els 
αὐτόν ; cf. Eph. v. 32; Heb. vii. 14), but those sufferings are straight- 
way followed by corresponding stages in the attainment of glory, 
τὰς μετὰ ταῦτα δόξας. The plural probably denotes successive mani- 
festations of glory, e.g. in the Betrayal (Jn xiii. 31) when the 
ideal of self-sacrifice was revealed, in the Cross (Jn xii. 23) when the 
fruitfulness of such sacrifice was shewn, in the Resurrection as 
the victory over death (1 Pet. i. 21), in the Ascension as the 
enthronement of manhood with God (Jn vii. 39), and finally in His 
triumphant Return completed in all His members (Col. iii. 4). 

The same pathway of suffering is employed by God in bringing 
His other sons to glory, i.e. to their ideal perfection. It is only by 
suffering with Christ that we can be glorified with Him (Rom. viii. 17; 
ef. 2 Tim. ii. 10—12). The light affliction which is but for a moment 
worketh for us a far more exceeding weight of glory (2 Cor. iv. 17). 
Present sufferings are not worthy to be compared with the glory that 
shall be revealed (Rom. viii. 18).. So St Peter regards the trials of 


1 10] NOTES 27 


Christians as a refining process which will result in glory at the 
revelation of Jesus Christ (i. 7). — 

Fellowship in Christ’s sufferings should be a cause of joy that 
they may rejoice with exultation at the revelation of His glory (iv. 13). 
To be reproached in Christ’s name means that a mark or characteristic 
of the glory which is one day to be theirs (τὸ τῆς δόξης) is already 
resting upon them (iv. 14). 

It is as a μάρτυς of Christ’s sufferings that St Peter is a partaker of 
the glory which is to be revealed (v. 1). It is the God of all favour 
who called them to His eternal glory in Christ after a little suffering 
(v. 10). So the joy which Christians should have in the midst of 
their trials and griefs is δεδοξασμένη, already irradiated with the glory 
to which such sufferings really belong (i. 8). 

9. κομιζόμενοι. The middle voice denotes either receiving back a 
possession, Matt. xxv. 27, or receiving a promised gift, Heb. x. 36, xi. 
39, and probably xi. 19, that Abraham received his long promised 
son figuratively out of death because his own body and that of Sarah 
were “85 good as dead,” or receiving a reward earned, 2 Cor. v. 10; 
Eph. vi. 8; Col. 111. 25; 1 Pet. v. 4. 

So here by faith in the long prepared σωτηρία Christians do receive 
already some of the blessings of that σωτηρία which is the goal of that 
faith—namely, the deliverance, the passage from death into life of 
man’s true self, the divine life or soul of which his bodily life is but 
the image. . 

τῆς πίστεως, The insertion of the article does not necessarily 
mean ‘‘ your faith” nor ‘* the Faith” in the sense of the doctrines of 
the Christian Faith, although the faith which is implied certainly 
means Christian faith in God’s mercy through Christ. 

A noun in the genitive governed by another noun bearing an 
article generally takes the article. But τῆς πίστεως in vv. 7 and 9 
may refer back to διὰ πίστεως in v. 5=the above-named faith; cf. 
Rom. iii. 29, ἐκ πίστεως...διὰ τῆς πίστεως; Jas. 11, 14, 15, riorw...4 
πίστις. 

10. Plumptre (Camb. Bible, 1 Pet., p. 98) and others would 
explain the passage which follows as referring to New Testament 
prophets or preachers of the first days of the Church, who constantly 
uttered inspired warnings of a coming time of persecution for Christians 
which would be followed by glory. Such persecution however did 
not come immediately, and so the prophets gradually realized that 
their message was not for their own generation. Now however their 
warnings are being fulfilled in the Neronian persecution. In support 
of this view it is urged that ‘‘the Spir?t of Christ” would be more 


28 I PETER (1 10— 


appropriate to Christian prophets than to those of the O.T. and that 
τὰ els Χριστὸν παθήματα means sufferings of Christians as members of 
Christ which pass on to Him as their Head. But this interpretation is 
somewhat unnatural; moreover St Peter had himself been one of the 
earliest preachers of the Church, and he distinctly contrasts the 
ministry of the prophets with the proclamation which is now made 
by the Mission of the Holy Spirit. The reference is probably to the 
numerous passages in the O.T., especially in the later prophets, 
which predicted the admission of the Gentiles (τῆς εἰς ὑμᾶς χάριτος, 
the free favour of God as reaching unto you Gentiles). 

χάρις (see Robinson, Eph. pp. 221 ff.) is specially used by St Paul 
(a) in connexion with his own mission as the apostle to the Gentiles, 
(Ὁ) of the Gentiles as the recipients of the Universal Gospel. 

So in Acts it is used eight times in passages which deal with the 
extension of the Gospel to the Gentiles. ‘‘ The surprising mercy of 
God, by which those who had been wholly outside the privileged 
circle were now the recipients of the divine favour, seems to have 
called for a new and impressive name which might be the watchword 
of the larger dispensation.” 

It is in this sense that St Peter uses the word here. He may 
have in mind the numerous O.T. passages quoted by St Paul 
(Rom. ix., x., xv.) to shew that the inclusion of Gentiles was always 
contemplated. 

Such predictions were accompanied by solemn asseverations of 
sufferings destined for the (coming) Messiah, τὰ εἰς Χριστὸν παθήματα, 
yet each prophecy of suffering was crowned with a prophecy of 
subsequent glory; cf. Lk. xxiv. 26, ‘‘ Behoved it not the Christ 
to suffer these things and to enter into His glory” was the lesson 
which our Lord expounded from the Scriptures to the two 
disciples on the road to Emmaus. 

ἐκζητεῖν, to seek out; ἐξεραυνᾷν, to search by minute investi- 
gation. 

προφῆται. Even prophets, despite their divine mission, were less 
privileged than Christians. They sought and searched for the full 
meaning of God’s messages which they delivered. Now that meaning 
is fully proclaimed, cf. Matt. xiii. 17. 

11. εἰς τίνα ἢ ποῖον καιρὸν, searching (to discover) what or what 
manner of season was pointed to (eis). If God withheld from them 
the precise time when His promises were to be fulfilled, they desired 
at least to know whether it was to be in the immediate or only in the 
distant future. 

πνεῦμα Χριστοῦ can hafdly mean “ the Spirit which spake of 


1 ἘΠ) NOTES 29 


Christ,” taking Χριστοῦ as an objective genitive. Nor is it likely to 
mean merely the Spirit which in after days dweltin Christ. It might 
mean the Spirit belonging to or “proceeding from Christ Himself. 
Certainly the Holy Spirit is described as πνεῦμα Χριστοῦ, Rom. viii. 9; 
πνεῦμα “I. X., Phil. i. 19; πνεῦμα ᾿Ιησοῦ, Acts xvi. 7; πνεῦμα τοῦ 
υἱοῦ, Gal. iv. 6. In Jn i. 9, 10, the Logos is described as having been 
all along in the world; a light was coming into the world to lighten 
every man. So Justin Martyr, Apol. i. 36, describes the prophets as 
moved by the divine Logos and sometimes speaking in the person of 
Christ, ἀπὸ προσώπου τοῦ Χριστοῦ ; and Clem. Al. adv. Haer. tv. 7. 2, 
says : Qui adventum Christi prophetaverunt revelationem acceperunt 
ab ipso Filio. 

According to this interpretation Christ is described as inspiring 
the prophets by His Spirit to predict the sufferings destined for 
Himself. 

But (see Hort, p. 52) we must remember that Χριστὸς, with or 
without the article, was not originally a proper name, but a title, 
“ Messiah,” “the Lord’s Anointed,” and, although Jesus Christ was 
the Messiah, the nation, the kings, and the prophets were also the 
Lord’s anointed; cf. Ps. cv. 15, “Touch not mine anointed (τῶν 
χριστῶν pov) and do my prophets no harm.” Similarly in language 
which our Lord afterwards applied to Himself the prophet in 
describing his own mission, Is. lxi. 1 ff., says, ‘‘ The Spirit of the 
Lord is upon me because He anointed me” (ἔχρισέν με). In this 
sense the prophets shared in the Messiahship of their Divine Master, 
and the Spirit which spake by them was the Spirit of the Lord’s 
anointed, πνεῦμα Χριστοῦ. 

ἐδήλου προμαρτυρόμενον should probably be coupled together. 
δηλοῦν does not necessarily mean “ to make plain.’”’ The prophets 
were only able to discover part of what was meant. The word is 
used of making a communication to a person (1 Cor. i. 11; Col. i. 8), 
or of signifying or implying something indirectly (Heb. ix. 8, xii. 27). 

μαρτύρεσθαι means literally ‘‘ to call to witness,” so ‘‘ to protest ”’ 
as in the presence of witnesses; cf. Gal. v. 3; Eph.iv. 17, μαρτύρομαι 
ἐν Κυρίῳ. So here the sense seems to be that the Spirit which spake 
by the prophets asseverated in God’s name, “" Thus saith the Lord.” 

τὰ εἰς Χριστὸν παθήματα does not merely mean ‘ the sufferings 
of Christ,” cf. v. 1, but “sufferings destined for the Messiah,” cf. τῆς 
els ὑμᾶς χάριτος just above ; cf. εἰς ὑμᾶς, v. 4; or “pointing to” Christ, 
ef, Acts ii. 25, Aaveld λέγει εἰς αὐτόν. The sufferings described by the 
. Prophets (e.g. Ps. xxii., and esp. Is, liii.) only received their fulfilment 
in Christ. 


30 I PETER [i vi 


In one sense the sufferings of O.T. saints were unconsciously on 
Christ’s behalf, and as it were ‘“‘ passed on” to Him (cf. Moses 
bearing the reproach of Christ, Heb. xi. 26), just as Christians now 
‘¢fill up what is lacking in the sufferings of Christ,” Col. i. 24, but it 
may be doubted whether St Peter intended to include that thought. 

12. οἷς ἀπεκαλύφθη. In answer to their searching enquiry the 
prophets, says St Peter, though “it was not for them to know the 
times and seasons which the Father set within His own authority,” 
were nevertheless permitted to realize that the messages which they 
were delivering as God’s ministers (διηκόνουν) were not for their own 
times or their own people only, but that the manifestation of Messiah 
belonged to the far future and to all mankind. The teaching of the 
prophets had of course a primary message for their own times, but 
this did not exhaust its meaning. 

νῦν means the Christian dispensation as contrasted with the 
earlier age of the prophets. 

ἀνηγγέλη. The word occurs in Is. lii. 15, οἷς οὐκ ἀνηγγέλη περὶ 
αὐτοῦ ὄψονται, a passage which St Paul applies to his own missionary 
work among the Gentiles, Rom. xv. 21, and so here St Peter, in 
thinking of the announcement to Gentiles, perhaps borrowed the 
word from St Paul. The verb ἀναγγέλλειν in the N.T. retains its 
proper classical meaning of announcing in detail. So here the several 
facts of the Gospel and the implicit teachings and hopes involved in 
them are announced by Christian teachers. 

ὑμῖν. The T.R. reads ἡμῖν, which would mean ‘us Christians,”’ 
but all the best MSS. read ὑμῖν, which suggests the Gentiles. 

διὰ τῶν εὐαγγελισαμένων ὑμᾶς, by the agency of those who gladdened 
you with good tidings. εὐαγγελίζεσθαι is used with an acc. of the 
person in Lk. and Acts, where the subject of the message is not given, 
otherwise the dative is used. The preachers referred to would include 
St Paul, Barnabas, Silas, Timothy, Epaphras (see Col.), and others 
whose names are unknown, but St Peter does not definitely claim any 
personal share in the work, and we have no evidence that he had ever 
visited Asia Minor, 

πνεύματι ἁγίῳ ἀποσταλέντι ἀπ᾽ οὐρανοῦ. The T.R. has ἐν, an 
early Alexandrian interpolation, and the simple dative is almost 
unique. The ‘‘dynamic”’’ dative describes that in virtue of which a 
thing exists or is done. The “instrumental” sense is only one aspect 
of this. πνεῦμα ἅγιον without the article might mean one who is 
none other than a spirit of holiness (cf. \Heb. i. 2, ἐλάλησεν ἡμῖν ἐν 
υἱῷ =one who is a Son and no mere prophet). It was the same Holy 
Spirit who ‘‘ spake by the prophets,” but the mode of His operation 


1 13] NOTES 31 


was different. The outpouring of the Spirit, His mission to the 
world as sent (ἀποσταλέντι) by the Son from the Father did not take 
place until after the Ascension, cf. Jn vii. 39, οὕπω yap ἦν πνεῦμα 
ὅτι ᾿Τησοῦς οὔπω ἐδοξάσθη. 

παρακύψαι. κύπτειν and its compounds are used of bending the 
body up, down, or forwards, e.g. kiyas=stooping down, συγκύπτειν 
=to be bowed together, ἀνακύπτειν =to straighten oneself or look up. 
So παρακύπτειν means to stretch the head forward to look into or 
down upon something. It is used of St John ‘‘ peeping into” the 
tomb (Jn xx. 5) and again in Jas. i. 25 of a man who ‘‘ glances 
into the perfect law of liberty.” So in the Book of Henoch (1x. i. 
p. 83, ed. Dillm.), from which St Peter may be borrowing here, it 
is used of the four archangels ‘‘ looking down” upon the earth out 
of the sanctuary of heaven. 

The angels are described as spectators of the Christian’s conflict 
in 1 Cor. iv. 9, θέατρον ἐγενήθημεν... ἀγγέλοις. They rejoice over one 
sinner that repents, Lk. xv. 10. They were watching the unfolding 
of the mystery of God’s loving purpose for the world in the Incarna- 
tion (ὠφθη ἀγγέλοις, 1 Tim, 111. 16). So here the admission of the 
Gentiles is a further unfolding of that mystery pointing forward to 
‘‘the final consummation of all things,” and each stage is watched 
with eager longing eyes by God’s angels as they ‘‘ look down”’ upon 
the world. Similarly in Eph. iii. 10 St Paul says that the admission 
of the Gentiles into the Church is a making known of the manifold 
wisdom of God to principalities and powers in heavenly places. 

This thought adds dignity to the position of Christians as God’s 
“chosen people.’’ Their ‘‘ election” is due to the Father’s fore- 
knowledge, it is effected by the sanctifying influence of the Holy 
Spirit, and sealed by the sprinkled blood of Christ as the covenant 
victim. They are begotten to a new life by the resurrection. A 
glorious inheritance is theirs. Their salvation was no new thing— 
no afterthought. It was the subject of anxious search on the part of 
the prophets who foretold it, and its future development is watched 
by angels with eager anticipation. 


IntRopucTORY ExXHORTATION FOUNDED UPON THE BENEDICTION. 
i. 13—-ii. 10. 


13—25. The new life of hope, faith and privilege to which you have 
been begotten involves corresponding responsibilities on your part. 
You must gird up the loins of your mind in readiness for active 
service, have all your faculties under perfect command, and set your 


13 


32 1 PETER [1 13— 


hope upon God’s favour which is ever being brought to you in the 
14 progressive unveiling to you of Jesus Christ. Remember that as 
God’s children you are pledged to hearken to His voice and follow 
His guidance. You must not follow the fashion of your old heathen 
days, when you had no rule of life beyond your own erratic impulses. 
15 You have been called by the Holy One, therefore you yourselves also 
16 must shew yourselves to be holy in all your dealings. The ideal 
which God has laid down for you is nothing less than to imitate Him. 
17 You must not presume upon your sonship (any more than might the 
Jews). In addressing God as ‘‘ Our Father” you must remember 
that He is also your Judge. Under the New Covenant as under the 
Old, He will shew no favouritism to the children of the covenant if 
their works prove them to be unworthy of favour. Do not then be 
over confident or reckless. In all your sojourning as strangers in the 
world your dealings with those around you must be regulated by a 
sense of responsibility, by a reverent fear of being untrue to your high 
18 position. You are God’s ransomed people rescued (like Israel from 
Egypt) from the slavery of your old vain heathen life, a slavery 
intensified by the inherited instincts and habits of past centuries of 
ancestors. Remember how much your deliverance cost. It was no 
19 perishable ransom of silver or gold. It was nothing less than the 
inestimably precious Blood of Christ, who is our true Paschal Lamb, 
20 without inherent blemish or external stain of sin, a victim designated 
by God before the foundation of the world, but only manifested in 
the fulness of time at the end of the long series of periods of 
21 preparation for the sake of you Gentiles who through Him are 
faithful as resting upon God who raised Him from the dead and 
crowned Him with glory. God Himself then is the centre and object 
22 not only of your faith but also of your hope. In yourconversion and 
your Baptism you profess, by virtue of the obedience which springs 
from your possession of the truth, to have purified and consecrated 
your souls to enter into the spirit of your sonship by unfeigned love 
from the heart for your brethren in Christ. Fulfil that vow of 
consecration then by loving one another, not fitfully but with 
23 strenuous and steady earnestness. A living and abiding love such as 
that is alone consistent with the new life into which you have been 
begotten. Your character, your love, ought to conform to the seed 
from which you are sprung, and that seed is no transient, perishable 
thing; it is incorruptible, it is the Word of God who liveth and 
24 abideth for ever. For (to apply to you the prophet’s message 
assuring exiled Israel of the certainty of God’s promise of deliverance 
despite the weakness of all human hopes) the natural life of 


1 14] NOTES 33 


heathenism is perishable like grass, its brightness and attractiveness 

is as transient as that of flowers, it soon withers and wastes, but the 25 
word of Jehovah abideth for ever. “And that word, originally spoken 

to Israel, is the message of good tidings which was extended to you 
Gentiles, 

13. διὸ sums up all the preceding verses=on the strength of 
such a position of privilege and dignity. 

ἀναζωσάμενοι. Girding up the loins is a symbol of prompt 
readiness for active service as opposed to slackness and indolent 
heedlessness. So our Lord told His disciples that they must have 
their loins girded as servants waiting for their lord (Lk. xii. 35), but 
ἀναΐζ. only occurs here and in Prov. xxxi. 17. 

As St Peter in v. 18 describes his readers as ‘‘ ransomed ” by the 
Blood of the true passover lamb, it is possible that he may also have 
in mind the direction to Israel to ‘‘ have their loins girded ” at the first 
Passover (Ex. xii. 11) in readiness to avail themselves of the 
deliverance and start on their journey to inherit the Promised Land. 
So Christians need to brace up their minds, otherwise their hope will 
not be set towards the favour which is being brought to them, and 
they may forfeit the deliverance and the inheritance. 

νήφοντες τελείως. τελείως is generally joined with the following 
word ἐλπίσατε; so A.V. hope to the end, R.V. set your hope perfectly 
on. But St Peter’s usual custom is to join adverbs with the preceding 
word, and so it is better here to translate being perfectly sober. 

The Christian must not only have his mind braced for action 
(ἀναζωσάμενοι), but all his faculties must be under perfect control, with 
no confusion, no unhealthy excitement. 

ἐπὶ. Set your hope in the direction of. You must turn to God’s 
free favour to you as the ground upon which your hope of glory must 
rest. 

φερομένην. The word is used in Acts ii. 2 of the ‘‘rushing mighty 
wind.” Here the idea seems to be that God’s loving favour is 
_ continually being conveyed to mankind in the ever-widening, ever- 

deepening revelation of Jesus Christ in the expansion of the Church 
and the daily life and experience of the Christian. But in this life 
we only see Him ‘‘in a glass darkly,” but one day the veil will be 
entirely removed and we shall see Him ‘‘ face to face.’’ 

14. ὡς τέκνα ὑπακοῆς. The form of the expression is a Hebraism 
(cf. sons of Belial), but (as in the parallel passage, Eph. ii. 2, τοῖς υἱοῖς 
τῆς ἀπειθεία5) the phrase is used by St Peter to mean more than merely 
obedient children.” ‘Children of obedience” are those who belong 
to obedience as a child to its mother, The impulses and principles 


I PETER C 


34 I PETER [1 14— 


which mould their lives are derived from it, and they are the 
representatives or exponents of it to others. To have been ‘‘ begotten 
again ’”’ by God (v. 3) demands the character of obedience on the part 
of His covenant children. They must ever listen to His voice and 
follow His guidance, striving to be like their Father. 

μὴ συνσχηματιζόμενοι. ‘The word is a late and rare one, and only 
occurs again in Rom. xii. 2 (where it is contrasted with jera- 
μορφοῦσθαι). σχῆμα denotes the outward changeable fashion in con- 
trast with μορφή, the permanent and essential form; cf. Phil. iii. 21, 
So here conduct which is ruled by capricious desires has no con- 
sistent inner principle or fixed pattern (μορφή), but is unstable and at 
the mercy of transient outward circumstances, ‘‘ the fashion (σχῆμα) 
of this world which passeth away” (1 Cor. vii. 31). 

ἐν τῇ ἀγνοίᾳ ὑμῶν. In St Peter’s speech, Acts iii. 17, ἀγνοία is 
used to describe the condition of the Jews in rejecting and crucifying 
Christ, but it is much more commonly used of the heathen world, 
cf. Acts xvii. 30; Eph. iv. 18. So here St Peter is probably con- 
trasting the present condition of his readers with their former 
condition as heathen when they had no knowledge of God on which 
to model their lives. 

15. κατὰ τὸν καλέσαντα ὑμᾶς ἅγιον (cf. Eph. i. 4, iv. 1, v. 1, ete.). 
After the model of Him that called you, Who is holy. Here we have 
the true model (εἰκών) to which men’s lives are to be conformed 
(σύμμορφοι, cf. Rom. viii. 29; Col. iii. 10). The original purpose of 
God in creation was that man made in His image should grow into 
His likeness. ‘‘By divers portions and in divers manners” 
culminating in the Incarnation the divine likeness has been gradually 
revealed, and those who are “ called” into covenanted relationship 
with God are bidden to be ‘‘imitators of God as beloved children,” 
Eph. v. 1. 

ἅγιος, like the Hebrew wT , meant originally ‘‘ set apart,” distinct 
from ordinary things. It was at first applied to persons (e.g. Ex. xxii. 
31), places (Ex. iii. 5, ete.) or things (1 Kings vii. 51) which were 
‘set apart ” for religious use, regarded as being connected with the 
presence or service of God. It is not easy to decide how the same 
word came also to be applied to God Himself. Some would suggest 
that it was because God was regarded as “ set apart,” separated from 
what was common or unclean. Others think that as things set 
apart for God were required to be without stain or blemish, the word 
ἅγιος applied to them acquired the meaning of ‘‘pure,” ‘ un- 
blemished,” and, as applied to persons, moral purity as well as 
physical would gradually be understood as being necessary. In this 


117] NOTES 35 


sense (the idea of ““ set apart”’ being lost sight of) the word might be 
applied to God. And in proportion as the conception of God became 
elevated and purified so the idea of God’s Holiness would acquire a 
more awful purity (e.g. Is. vi. 3). But in either case, when once the 
word ἅγιος had come to be applied to God, the idea of what ““ holiness” 
must mean in God would react upon all the lower applications of the 
word to men. Those who claimed a special relationship to God 
would be understood as requiring to have a moral character con- 
formable to that of God. 

Generally in the N.T. the title ἅγιος describes the Christian’s 
privilege, as one whom God has ‘‘ set apart” for Himself, rather than 
the Christian’s character. But such consecration to God demands a 
corresponding character, and here St Peter emphasizes that demand 
by quoting the standard laid down in the ‘‘ Law of Holiness,” ‘“ Ye 
shall be holy, for I am holy,’ Lev. xi. 44, 45, xix. 2. In the former 
passage the words are connected with things which were to be 
regarded as clean or unclean, but in the latter they are connected 
with various moral laws. 

γενήθητε. Shew yourselves to be, prove yourselves worthy of the 
title which you claim in every detail of your dealings with other men. 
ἀναστροφή = your converse or intercourse with those around you. 

17. εἰ πατέρα ἐπικαλεῖσθε. If ye invoke as Father. ἐπικαλεῖσθαι 
in the middle does not mean merely to call a person by a certain 
name or title, but to invoke or appeal to for aid. It is the word 
used by St Paul, Acts xxv. 11, ‘‘I appeal unto Caesar,” and of 
St Stephen appealing and saying, ‘‘ Lord Jesus, receive my spirit,” 
Acts vii. 59. Here there is very probably an allusion to the invocation 
of God as “ Our Father” in the Lord’s prayer. But the words may 
also be borrowed from Jer. iii. 19, where some MSS. of the LXX. read 
ei πατέρα καλεῖσθέ (or ἐπικαλεῖσθέ) we, though the best text is εἶπα 
Πατέρα καλέσετέ με. 

The sense of sonship which allows us to invoke God as ‘ Our 
Father ” ‘‘in the words which Christ Himself hath taught us” does 
not warrant any presumption on our part. We must not forget that 
God is also “ the Judge of all the earth.” 

ἀπροσωπολήμπτως. The adverb occurs nowhere else in the 
Greek Bible, but the adjective is used by the Fathers, and the 
substantive προσωπολήμπτης occurs in St Peter’s speech to Cornelius, 
Acts x. 34, and προσωπολημψία in Rom. ii. 11 with reference to 
God. It is not a classical word, but is based upon the Hebrew NW3 
‘35, to receive the face of, so to favour a person, either in a good 
sense to receive favourably or in a bad sense of undue favour, 


C2 


36 I PETER [1 17— 


partiality. As applied to God in the N.T., it is generally used with 
reference to His dealings with Jews and Gentiles, that both are 
treated alike by Him. But, on the other hand, equality of favour 
implies impartiality of judgment for all. The children of the new 
covenant will not be treated with undue leniency if their works prove 
them to be unworthy of God’s favour any more than were the children 
of the old covenant, as they were warned by Moses, Deut. x. 17. 

κρίνοντα. The present participle may be a reminder that God’s 
judgment is not merely future but continually exercised, or it may be 
merely a descriptive participle. 

κατὰ τὸ ἑκάστου ἔργον (cf. Rom. ii. 6 ff.). Every man, whether he 
be Jew, Gentile or heathen, is judged according to the sum of his 
personal actions in thought, word and deed. 

ἐν φόβῳ. The thought of God as “ Our Father” can give us hope 
and love, but the reminder that He is also our Judge should inspire 
us with reverent fear. Not the shrinking fear of the slave (Rom. viii. 
15), for that is “" cast out” by perfect love (1 Jn iv. 18), not the fear 
of the coward (1 Pet. iii. 14), but the fear of being untrue to God, 
which makes a man bold in the face of all other dangers (Matt. x. 28 ||). 

παροικίας. In one sense these Asiatic Christians were sojourners 
among a heathen population with whom they were brought into 
constant intercourse (ἀναστράφητε). In another sense all Christians 
are men whose true ‘‘ citizenship is in heaven ” (Phil. iii. 20). This 
world is not their home, but only the place of their temporary 
sojourn. 

18. εἰδότες. The thought of what their deliverance has cost 
increases the responsibility of Christians to ‘‘ walk worthily.” 

ἐλυτρώθητε, ye were ransomed. The word is used of deliverance 
from slavery or from exile, e.g. of the deliverance of Israel from 
Egypt (Ex. vi. 6, xv. 13, ete.). So St Stephen speaks of Moses as 
λυτρωτής. Again Isaiah lii. 3, speaking of the deliverance from 
Babylon, says, οὐ μετὰ ἀργυρίου λυτρωθήσεσθε. In Lk. ii. 38 Anna 
‘‘ spake of Jesus to all those that were looking for the redemption 
(λύτρωσιν) of Jerusalem” (R.V.), referring to the Messianic king- 
dom as the deliverance from foreign rule; cf. Lk. xxiv. 21, ‘‘ We 
hoped that it was He which should redeem (λυτροῦσθαι) Israel.” 
Similarly Christians are to welcome the signs of the coming of the 
Son of Man as a token that their redemption draweth nigh, i.e. their 
deliverance, Lk. xxi. 28. So sin is regarded as a state of slavery from 
which man needs deliverance, and in Eph. 1. 7, Col.i.14, St Paul defines 
ἀπολύτρωσις aS ἄφεσις παραπτωμάτων ΟΥ ἁμαρτιῶν, letting go free from 
sins, and in Titus ii. 14 he says that ‘‘ Christ Jesus gave Himself on 


119) NOTES 37 


our behalf that he might redeem (λυτρώσηται) from all iniquity and 
purify unto himself a people for his own possession,” just as Israel 
were made God’s ‘peculiar people” by being ‘‘purchased and 
redeemed of old.” So here St Peter regards the old heathen life of 
his readers as a state of slavery from which they have been ransomed. 
But besides the mere idea of rescue or deliverance the word λυτροῦσθαι 
suggests also deliverance by the payment of a ransom by another, 
and the ransom given for man’s deliverance from the slavery of 
sin was the life-blood of Christ Himself; cf. Matt. xx. 28; Mk x. 
45, ‘‘The Son of Man came...to give His life a ransom for many” 
(λύτρον ἀντὶ πολλῶν) ; ef. 1 Tim. ii. 6, ὁ δοὺς ἑαυτὸν ἀντίλυτρον ὑπὲρ 
πάντων. So here the blood, as representing the surrendered life, is 
the ransom; cf. Rev. i. 5, ““ἴο him that loosed us (λύσαντι, not 
λούσαντιτε washed, as T.R.) from our sins (ἐν τῷ αἵματι αὐτοῦ) at the 
price of his own blood.” We must not, however, over-press the 
metaphor and ask to whom the ransom was paid. Most of the early 
Fathers regarded the ransom as paid to the devil as being the slave- 
owner. Such a thought is abhorrent to us, yet the other suggested 
alternative that the price was paid to the Father would imply that the 
Father’s pardon required to be bought, whereas “ God so loved the 
world that He gave his only begotten Son,’’ and in one passage (Acts 
xx. 28) the Father Himself seems to be described as the ransomer or 
purchaser. Cf. Rev. xiv. 3, 4. 

ἐκ τῆς ματαίας ὑμῶν ἀναστροφῆς. This is the state of slavery out 
‘of which (ἐκ) they were rescued. 

ματαίας. The adjective is used in 1 Kings xvi. 13, 2 Kings xvii. 
15, of idolatry; so in Acts xiv. 15 Paul and Barnabas speak of 
turning ἀπὸ τούτων τῶν ματαίων, i.e. idolatrous practices, and St Paul 
speaks of the heathen as walking ἐν ματαιότητι, Eph. iv. 27. 

pdracos=aimless, purposeless, and describes the futility of life 
without God. 

πατροπαραδότου. This word has been used as an argument that 
the readers had been Jews, whose παράδοσις is frequently spoken of 
disparagingly in the N.T., but the word would be equally applicable 
to Gentiles. Their ancestral heathenism was intensified by the 
accumulated habits of centuries. 

19. dpvov. Cf. Jni. 29. The reference is most probably to the 
passover lamb, which, though not actually the ransom paid for 
deliverance from Egypt, was closely connected with that deliverance 
and did redeem the firstborn of Israel from the destroying angel. So 
the regulation about the paschal lamb, ‘‘ Not a bone of him shall be 
. broken,” was applied to our Lord in Jn xix. 36, and in 1 Cor. v. 7 


38 I PETER [1 19— 


St Paul says Christ our Passover (i.e. paschal lamb) is sacrificed for 
us, and in Rev. xv. 3 the Song of the Lamb is associated with the 
Song of Moses. 

ἄμωμος, without blemish. There was an old Greek word μῶμος, 
meaning blame, from which a poetical word, ἄμωμος, blameless, was 
derived, but this is not the meaningin the Bible. The word μῶμος in 
the LXX. was borrowed to translate the Hebrew word Did (mim) = 
blemish. So when an adjective was needed to translate the word 
D'Dh=perfect, free from blemish, an adjective ἄμωμος was formed 
from μῶμος. The word is used again of Christ as an unblemished 
sacrifice in Heb. ix. 14; of Christians in Eph. i. 4, Col. i. 22, Phil. ii. 
15 v.l., Jude 24; of the Church, Eph. v. 27; and of those that 
follow the Lamb, Rev. xiv. 5. 

ἄσπιλος = without spot; cf. 1 Tim. vi. 14; 2 Pet. iii. 14; Jas i. 27. 
Christ was free alike from inherent blemish and from external 
defilement. 

20. προεγνωσμένου -- designated beforehand as God’s appointed 
agent. This was true not only of the Messiah as the long-expected 
King, but also of the suffering Messiah, the Lamb. This is the 
usual interpretation of Rev. xiii. 8, “‘ whose name hath not been 
written in the book of life of the Lamb that hath been slain from the 
‘foundation of the world” (ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου), but see R. V. margin. 

In Eph. i. 4 God is described as having chosen us in Christ πρὸ 
καταβολῆς κόσμου, and one factor in the execution of God’s purpose 
is ‘‘redemption by Christ’s blood.” Again, in Matt. xxv. 34, the 
Kingdom is said to have been prepared for God’s children ἀπὸ 
καταβολῆς κόσμου, and in Rev. vy. 9 the Lamb slain is said to have 
purchased men for God of every nation to be a kingdom and priests 
by His blood, In St Peter’s speech on the day of Pentecost Jesus is 
described as being delivered up (ἔκδοτον) by the determinate counsel 
and foreknowledge (προγνώσει) of God, Acts ii. 23. 

φανερωθέντος. The eternal purpose of God was not manifested to 
the world until the ‘‘ fulness of the times”? was come; cf. 1 Tim. ii. 6 
and Rom. xvi. 25, 26. 

ἐπ᾽ ἐσχάτου τῶν χρόνων, at the end of the times, cf. καιρῷ ἐσχάτῳ, 
v. 5. The Christian dispensation is regarded as the climax for which 
all the earlier periods of God’s dealings with the world were pre- 
paratory. Cf. 1 Cor. x. 11, the story of Israel in the wilderness was 
written ‘‘ for our admonition upon whom the ends of the ages are 
come”; Heb. i. 2, God has spoken to us by the Son, ἐπ᾽ ἐσχάτου τῶν 
ἡμερῶν τούτων; ix. 26, Christ sacrificed Himself ‘‘at the end of the 
ages,” ἐπὶ συντελείᾳ τῶν αἰώνων. 


1 22] NOTES 39 


21. δι ὑμᾶς, for the sake of you Gentiles, cf. Eph. iii: 5; Rom. 
xvi. 26. The revelation of Christ was made for your sake, because it is 
through Christ that you are enabled to be faithful as resting upon 
God (πιστοὺς eis θεόν). πιστός in the LXX. never means ‘‘believing” 
or trustful, but is used to translate the Hebrew word }ON2 =firm, 
secure. As applied to persons, a firm friend is one who is trust- 
worthy, and so πιστός acquired the meaning trustworthy, faithful. 
But in the N.T. the active use of πίστις, viz. belief, is much more 
common than the passive trustworthiness, fidelity, and so the 
adjective πιστός is occasionally used in the sense of believing—e.g. six 
times in the Pastoral Epp., possibly also in Eph. i. 1 and Col. i. 1— 
and with a new application of Abraham’s old title in Gal. iii. 9. It 
is also used in the sense of a believer as opposed to ἄπιστος, an 
unbeliever, in Jn xx. 27; 2 Cor. vi. 15; and without ἄπιστος in 
Acts xvi. 1. But there is no instance of πιστός in the sense of 
believing, followed by a preposition. So here Hort would translate 
“faithful as resting on God” rather than believers in God (as the 
R.V.). If St Peter had intended this he would have written πιστεύ- 
ovras, which is the reading of the T.R. Moreover, in that case, the 
words which follow at the end of the verse would be a meaningless 
repetition. The remembrance that death led to resurrection and 
glory in the case of Christ enables the Christian to be ‘‘ faithful unto 
death” as leading to the crown of life; cf. Heb. ii. 9, Jesus is 
crowned with glory and honour because of the suffering of death, and 
this perfecting of the Captain of their salvation through sufferings 
befits God’s purpose in bringing many sons to glory; ef. Rom. viii. 17. 

ὥστε might be taken as a final particle=in order that, i.e. God’s 
purpose in raising Christ to glory was that your faith and hope 
should be centred upon Himself. More probably it is here a 
consecutive particle=so that. St Peter sums up the result of all that 
he has said, and shews that God is the foundation and the goal of 
human faith and hope. 

22. St Peter continues his exhortation, which has _ been 
interrupted by a reminder to his readers of their high privilege 
(vv. 18—21). 

ἡγνικότες. The adjective ἁγνός in the O. T. means (a) ceremonially 
pure, free from defilement; (b) morally pure, which is its only 
meaning in the N.T. The verb ayvifew is nearly always used in the 
ceremonial sense in the O.T. and four times in the N.T., but here 
and in Jas iv. 8, 1 Jn iii. 3 it denotes moral purification. In 
accepting baptism, St Peter implies, you symbolized your cleansing 
' from defilement, you consecrated yourselves to God’s service. The 


40 I PETER [1 22— 


perfect participle denotes the abiding consequences of a past action. 
You profess to be men who have purified and consecrated themselves. 

ἐν τῇ ὑπακοῇ τῆς ἀληθείας, in virtue of your obedience which is 
prompted by the truth; cf. i. 2, ἐν ἁγιασμῷ. ..εἰς ὑπακοήν. Your old 
life was one of ignorance (i. 14). Now God has revealed the truth to 
you, and the possession of that truth, telling you of your sonship to 
God, sets before you a standard of obedience, ‘‘ Be ye holy, for I am 
holy.” Your self-consecration consists in and depends on your 
obedience to that standard. It is meaningless unless you are τέκνα 
ὑπακοῆς. 

εἰς φιλαδελφίαν. Self-consecration as obedient children of God 
necessarily pledges you to (eis) love of the brethren. φιλαδελφία does 
not mean merely ‘‘brotherly love,” but love of the Christian brother- 
hood; ef. ii. 17, and 1 Jn v. 1. There can be no true sonship of 
God without true brotherhood with the other children of ‘‘Our 
Father.” 

ἀνυπόκριτον. This love of our brethren in Christ must be no 
mere cant phrase, no unreal pretence. Cf. Rom. xii. 9, 2 Cor. vi. 6. 
It must spring from the heart and must be intense (ἐκτενῶς), not fitful 
or capricious, but steady and strenuous. For ἐκτενής, applied to love, 
ef, iv. 8, and to prayer cf. Lk. xxii. 44, Acts xii. 5; cf. also Acts 
xxvi. 7. 

23. dvayeyevvynpévor; cf. i. 3, the only other place where the 
word occurs. The verses which follow state the obligation and the 
source of Christian love. They have been brought into a new state 
of existence, they are born into a new divine sonship, and it is their 
common sonship which constitutes their new brotherhood with each 
other. Love is the essential characteristic of life derived from God, 
for. ‘‘God is Love.” The proof of true sonship is to inherit the 
Father’s nature; cf. 1 Jn iv. 7, πᾶς ὁ ἀγαπῶν ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ γεγέννηται. 
Christian love must be unfeigned (ἀνυπόκριτος) and earnest (ἐκτενής), 
because the seed from which it springs is nothing less than ‘‘the 
word of God who lives and abides for ever.” The fruit of that seed 
therefore must also be “living” and ‘‘ abiding,” with no fading, no 
decay. 

διὰ λόγου ζῶντος θεοῦ Kal μένοντος. ζῶντος καὶ μένοντος are 
generally explained as agreeing with λόγου on the following grounds: 
(1) that the point of the quotation which follows is that the word 
(ῥῆμα) of God abideth for ever; (2) that some epithet is needed for 
λόγου, the seed of Christian life, as contrasted with φθαρτῆς σπορᾶς; 
(3) that the phrase {Gv λόγος occurs in Heb. iv. 12; cf. λόγια ζῶντα, Acts 
vii. 38 and Jn vi. 63, where our Lord says that His ῥήματα are ζωή. 


1 24] NOTES 41 


On the other hand, the two epithets ζῶν and μένων are together 
applied to God in Dan. vi. 26, and the contrast with σπορὰ φθαρτή is 
even more marked by tracing tHe source of Christian life to the 
abiding life of God Himself. : 

λόγου means more than the Gospel message by which these 
Asiatic Christians were converted. That is described as ῥῆμα at the 
end of v. 25. It means God’s whole utterance of Himself in the 
Incarnation, in Scripture, in preaching, in the inward voice of 
conscience. In Jas i 18 the original creation of man is attributed to 
the λόγος ἀληθείας. The divine image was implanted in man, endowing 
him with a capacity for knowing God and hearing His voice. Here 
the reference is rather to man’s new creation as a Christian (cf. 
Intro. p. lvi.). 

24. διότι is used again to introduce a quotation in i. 16 and ii. 6. 

The quotation is taken from Isaiah xl. 6—8, and agrees with the 
LXX. in omitting the words “ because the breath of the Lord bloweth 
upon it.” But it differs from the LXX. (1) by inserting ὡς, (2) by 
substituting αὐτῆς for ἀνθρώπου, (3) by substituting Κυρίου for τοῦ 
θεοῦ ἡμῶν. Possibly, however, all of these changes already existed in 
the LXX. text used by St Peter. In the T.R. the first two have been 
altered here to agree with the usual text of the LXX. The words 
originally referred to the message of hope to the exiles in Babylon. 
Human help is weak and perishable, but God’s promise of restoration 
can never fail. Parts of the same passage are quoted in Jas i. 10—11 
to shew the transitoriness of riches (see Intro. p. lvii.). 

ἄνθος χόρτου means bright flowers such as the scarlet anemones 
which were characteristic of Palestine. 

ἐξηράνθη... ἐξέπεσεν, the aorists are. the LXX. rendering of the 
Hebrew perfect, which describes what has constantly been observed 
to happen. Accidentally this agrees with the classical idiom known 
as the ‘“‘gnomic aorist,” used in proverbial sayings, but the only 
instance of such a “gnomic aorist” in the N.T. is Jas i. 11, where 
the same passage of Isaiah is quoted in the context, and possibly in 
Jas i. 24, 

St Peter is contrasting the transitory character of heathen life, 
despite its many attractions, with the new life offered by God. 

τὸ ῥῆμα τὸ εὐαγγελισθὲν εἰς ὑμᾶς. ῥῆμα is the spoken (or written) 
utterance of the λόγος or meaning which the speaker desires to 
convey. The Christian message, like that to the exiles in Babylon, is 
one of good tidings (εὐαγγελισθέν) of deliverance, eis ὑμᾶς, extended to, 
_ the Gentiles. 


42 1 PETER [sia 


CHAPTER II 


ii. 1—10. GeneRAL EXHORTATION CONTINUED. 


1 ἢ then such sincerity and strenuousness of love is demanded in 
the new life imparted by the word of the living and abiding God, 
you must put away everything which is inconsistent with such love, 
every kind and form of malice whether secret or open, all guile and 

2 hypocrisy, all evil-speaking. If, as you profess, you have been born 
again you must have the spirit of little children, nay of new-born 

3 babes at their mothers’ breasts. If (as the Psalmist says) you have 
once tasted and seen how gracious the Lord is, you must crave for the 
milk which cannot be adulterated, milk to nourish the rational or 
spiritual element in your being, in order that thereby you may grow 

4 unto full salvation. You Gentiles (are not merely, as I said, the new 
“ Dispersion”), you are brought in as ‘‘ Proselytes,” joined not only to 
a holy people but to the manifested Christ who is their Head. He is 
the stone which men rejected, but which with God is chosen and 

5 precious, and moreover a living stone, in union with whom you 
yourselves also as living stones are gradually being built up (not to 
form an earthly Temple in which the Most High can never truly 
dwell), but to form a spiritual shrine intended for a holy work of 
priesthood to offer up (not material but) spiritual sacrifices, acts of 
self-oblation to God for the service of the community and as such 
acceptable to God through Jesus Christ as your Mediator and Head. 

6 This is no new idea; it stands thus in writing in the words of Isaiah, 
‘Behold I lay in Zion a stone that is elect, a corner-stone that is 
held precious, and he that believeth on it shall not be put to shame.” 

7 Faith, therefore, is the condition laid down by the prophet for being 
united with the corner-stone, and having fulfilled that condition it is 
to you that the ‘‘preciousness” of that stone belongs (though it was 

8 laid in Zion and you are for the most part Gentiles). But for such 
as are disbelieving the prophet’s words are also true. The judgment 
of worldly authorities who claim to be builders has been reversed. 
Christ, the stone whom they rejected, has become the head of the 
corner, and for them He is a stone of stumbling and a rock of offence, 
for they stumble at the word of God, rebelling against it. Yet even 
this stumbling, this rebellion, is no thwarting of God’s purpose! It 
is part of His loving plan (to make room for the inclusion of you 
Gentiles that ultimately the Jews may be brought back) (cf. Rom. 


2 2] NOTES 43 


xi. 11). But all the titles of honour addressed to Israel of old now 9 


belong to you Christians. You are a chosen race, a body of priests in 
the service of the great King, a holy nation, a people whom God has 
made His own possession (as Malachi said) in order that you may tell 
forth the excellences of Him who called you out of the darkness of 
heathenism into His marvellous light. Aforetime you were not a 
(chosen) people but now you are the people of God. Then you were 
not (special) recipients of God’s mercy but now that mercy has been 
extended to you in your conversion. 

1. ἀποθέμενοι οὖν. In the first three verses of this chapter 
St Peter shews (a) what must be put away (οὖν) as inconsistent with 
the strenuous love involved in the new life, (b) the spiritual hunger 
for divine food by which that life must be maintained and developed, 
and so in v. 4 reverts once more to the high privileges and corre- 
sponding responsibilities of the new Israel of God. 

ἀποτίθεσθαι in the middle frequently suggests the idea of stripping 
off, like clothing, e.g. of the works of darkness to put on the armour 
of light, Rom. xiii. 12, or of the old self to put on the new, Eph. iv. 22. 
But in the parallel passage, Col. 111, 8—10, the stripping off (ἀπεκδυσά- 
μενοι) Of the old self is coupled with putting away (ἀπόθεσθε) of anger, 
malice, etc., and in Jas i. 21 (see Introduction, p. lvi.) and 1 Pet. iii. 21 
ἀποτίθεσθαι and ἀπόθεσις are used of putting away filthiness. So 
here certain unhealthy humours must be got rid of from the system 
in order that the spiritual appetite necessary for growth unto salva- 
tion may assert itself. 

κακία in classical Greek means vice in general as opposed to 
ἀρετή, virtue, but in the N.T. the word occurs generally as one of 
a list of vices and means malice. Malice of every kind, whether open 
or secret, deceit and unreality, envyings of the advantages enjoyed 
by others, and all varieties of evil-speaking among Christians are 
utterly inconsistent with unfeigned love of the brethren and fervent 
love from the heart. 

2. ὡς ἀρτιγέννητα βρέφη, as new-born babes. The words evidently 
refer to ἀναγεγεννημένοι in i, 23. βρέφη is nowhere else used in this 
figurative sense, the usual word employed being νήπιοι. ἀρτιγέννητα 
also occurs nowhere else. The phrase must not however be exag- 
gerated as implying that the readers were very recent converts. 
Many of them must have been Christians of long standing. 

γάλα. In 1 Cor. iii. 2 and Heb. v. 12 the necessity for a ‘‘ milk 
diet” is referred to as a sign of immaturity incapable of digesting the 
more solid food to which mature (τέλειοι) Christians ought to advance, 
' but no such idea is intended here. There is a true sense in which the 


10 


44 I PETER (aio 


Christian should never grow out of infancy. As our Lord said, Matt. 
‘xviii. 3, ‘‘ Except ye become as little children (παιδία) ye cannot enter 
into the kingdom of heaven,” and in 1 Cor. xiv. 20 St Paul bids his 
readers τῇ κακίᾳ νηπιάζετε, cf. Ep. ad Diog. App. 11, Οὗτος ὁ am’ ἀρχῆς, 
ὁ καινὸς φανεὶς καὶ παλαιὸς εὑρεθείς, kal παντότε νέος ἐν ἁγίων καρδίαις 
γεννώμενος. So here Christians, whatever may be their standing, are 
to retain the simple innocent cravings of a babe at his mother’s breast 
who desires no other food. 

λογικὸν γάλα can hardly be translated milk of the word as 
in the A.V. It means milk to feed your reason (λόγον). So R.V. 
spiritual milk. Λόγος in Greek has a double meaning, (1) word, 
(2) reason, but there is no instance of the latter use in the Bible. 
Even the Λόγος doctrine in Jn i. 1 is probably not the same as 
that in Philo where it includes both the wisdom of God and God’s 
utterance of Himself or Word. In St John it probably represents 
merely the Word of God, i.e. the medium of communication with the 
world, which was regularly used in the Targums in passages where 
God is described in the O.T. as speaking or appearing to men. On 
the other hand λογικός in tke sense of ‘‘rational,” though not so used 
in Plato and Aristotle, was a favourite word with the Stoics and 
passed into common use—e.g. in Philo. In later ecclesiastical writers 
ἡ λογικὴ ψυχὴ denotes the highest element in the soul—ré πνεῦμα. 

The only other passage in the N.T. where λογικός occurs is in 
Rom. xii. 1, where Christians are bidden to present their bodies as 
‘*a living sacrifice to God which is their reasonable service,” λογικὴν 
λατρείαν, i.e. rational service as contrasted with the offering of an 
irrational animal. As St Peter also three verses later goes on to 
speak of Christians ‘‘offering up spiritual sacrifices,” it is probable 
that the passage in Romans was in his mind, and from it he may 
have borrowed λογικόν in a sense unsupported by any Biblical use of 
λόγος. At the same time his immediately preceding language about 
Christians being begotten again by the word of God (λόγου) was 
probably suggested by St. James’ language about the word of truth 
as the origin of man’s creation followed by an instruction to receive 
the ἔμφυτον λόγον. St Peter may therefore mean that the λογικόν or 
spiritual element in man, deriving its new birth as it does from the 
Λόγος of God, is also fed by the Λόγος, just as a mother feeds her babe 
at her own breast. So Clement (Paed. i. 6, p. 127) says, ‘‘ He who 
regenerated us nourishes us with His own milk, the Word, for 
everything which gives birth to aught else seems at once to supply 
nourishment to its own offspring.” In this case, although λογικὸν 
γάλα cannot be translated ‘‘ milk of the word” but milk to feed your 


2 4] NOTES 45 


reason or spirit, at the same time ‘‘the Word of God” is the milk by 
which spiritual life must be nourished if it is to grow unto salvation. 

ἄδολον. R.V. which is without guile, or unadulterated. The adj. 
does not occur again in the N.T. but ἀδόλως is found in Wisdom 
vii. 14, and cf. 2 Cor. iv. 2, δολοῦντες τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ. In one of 
the Fayyim Papyri ἄδολον coupled with καθαρόν is used of un- 
adulterated wheat. Just as mother’s milk is by its very nature 
unadulterated, so the food which God supplies to His children is free 
from any of the contaminating influences found in the sustenance 
which heathenism offers to the soul of man. But the special element 
of adulteration intended here is guile which has been referred to just 
above (πάντα δόλον). 

ἐν avr@=in virtue of that food. — 

eis σωτηρίαν, cf. i. 5. . Christians are already in a state of salva- 
tion but must ‘‘ grow in grace” in order that God’s work in them may 
be completed. 

3. εἰ ἐγεύσασθε ὅτι χρηστὸς ὁ κύριος. The words are doubtless 
borrowed from Ps. xxxiv. 8, ‘‘O taste and see that the Lord is 
gracious,” where χρηστός is merely the LXX. rendering for the Hebrew 
‘*good”’ and has not the special sense in which it is used of wine in 
Lk. v. 39. In the N.T. χρηστός as used of God denotes gracious- 
ness, lovingkindness. In Heb. vi. 5 we have a similar expression of 
‘‘ tasting that the word (ῥῆμα) of God is good (xadév).” 

ὁ κύριος in the Psalm means Jehovah whereas in the N.T. it 
commonly refers to Christ. In this passage St Peter immediately 
goes on to speak of Christ, but it is not safe to argue that he identifies 
Jehovah with Christ. But in receiving Christ we do taste of the 
goodness of the Father. 

4. πρὸς Sv προσερχόμενοι. The words were perhaps suggested 
by the LXX. of v. 5 of the same Psalm xxxiv. which St Peter has just 
quoted προσέλθατε πρὸς αὐτὸν καὶ φωτίσθητε, where the Hebrew is 
‘*they looked unto him.” 

In other passages of the LXX. the word προσέρχεσθαι is used of 
drawing near to God for worship, sacrifice or prayer. In this sense 
it is used with a dative in Heb. iv. 16, xii. 22, of Christians approaching 
God through Christ as their High-priest and sacrifice, and this idea may 
perhaps be included here, as St Peter goes on to describe Christians 
as having a priesthood to offer spiritual sacrifices. But besides this 
the verb was used, Ex. xii. 48, 49; Lev. xix. 33; Num. ix. 14; Is. liv. 
15, of a sojourner (προσήλυτος) coming to sojourn as a stranger among 
the Jews, and Dr Hort suggests that this idea would be quite in 
accordance with St Peter’s conception, His readers are not merely 


46 I PETER [2 4— 


the new dispersion (διασπορά, i. 1), they are also the new proselytes of 
the new Israel, but instead of being united merely to a holy people 
they are united to Christ Himself and are admitted to full priest- 
hood. We have a similar thought in Eph. ii. 11—22, from which 
passage St Peter goes on to borrow, that those who were once far off 
are brought nigh in Christ and built up into one temple of which 
Christ is the corner-stone. 

λίθον ζῶντα. The addition of ζῶντα brings out the thought that 
the union between Christ and His people is not a mere juxtaposition 
like that of dead objects but a growth in which living stones are 
incorporated with a living stone. 

ἀνθρώπων has a wider reference than ‘‘the builders” and includes 
both Jews and Gentiles. 

ἀποδεδοκιμασμένον, refused as unsuitable. λιθόλογοι (see Robinson, 
Eph. p. 261) were employed to test stones. Those which were rejected 
were perhaps marked dééx:uos=Latin reprobatus. The language of 
Ps. exviii. may have been suggested by some actual incident in the 
rebuilding of the Temple. The same verb is used by our Lord of 
His rejection by the chief priests and elders, Mk viii. 31; Lk. ix. 22. 

ἐκλεκτόν. The Hebrew of Is. xxviii. 16 is ‘ta tried stone’’ or 
‘stone of proving,” 1Π3 Jas, but the LXX. translators evidently 
read IMD JAN, 1.6. a chosen stone. The same change occurs in 


the LXX. of Prov. xvii. 3 and the converse in Prov. viii. 10. 

ἔντιμον in Is. xxvili. 16 represents a Hebrew word meaning 
precious, i.e. costly, and the word ἔντιμος is used in the same sense 
in 1 Sam. xxvi. 21; Ps. Ixxii. 14; Is. xliii. 4, but in the N.T., 
Lk. vii. 2, xiv. 8; Phil. ii. 29, it means honoured or honourable. 

δ. οἶκος πνευματικὸς, @ spiritual house as opposed to a ‘‘ house 
made with hands” like the Jewish temple, in which God could never 
really dwell, cf. Acts vii. 48. For the same idea that the Christian 
society is God’s true temple, cf. 1 Cor. iii. 16; Eph. ii. 22. 

els ἱεράτευμα ἅγιον. εἰς is inserted in the R.V. marg. and by 
W. H., ‘“‘A spiritual temple for a holy act of priesthood.” The 
ordinary text omitting εἰς takes ἱεράτευμα a8 a nominative in ap- 
position to οἶκος apparently in the sense of a body of priests, which is 
the meaning of the word in v. 9 where it is quoted from the LXX. of 
Ex. xix. 6 and represents the Hebrew word ‘‘priests.”” Here if εἰς is 
read with the best MSS. the sense is rather ‘‘an act of priesthood” 
which is explained by the words which follow. 

ἀνενέγκαι. ἀναφέρειν is used of the priest who actually offers up 
the sacrifice, whereas προσφέρειν could be used also of the worshipper. 


2 6]. NOTES 47 


Thus ἀναφέρειν is used of Abraham offering up Isaac in Jas ii. 21, of 
the high-priests in Heb. vii. 27, and of Christians in Heb. xiii. 15. 

πνευματικὰς θυσίας, spiritual as’ opposed to material sacrifices, 
ef. πνεύματι λατρεύοντες, Phil. iii. 3; λογικὴ λατρεία, Rom. xii. 1, of 
Christians presenting their bodies as a living sacrifice. Just as 
Christ sacrificed His life for the service of others so His members 
must give themselves in daily self-oblation for the service of the 
Christian community. 

εὐπροσϑέκτους, it is only with such spiritual sacrifices that ‘God 
is well pleased.” . 

Sid Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. All our sacrifices can only be offered to God 
or be acceptable to Him, when presented through the agency of our 
ascended High-priest, cf. Heb. xiii. 15, δι᾿ αὐτοῦ ἀναφέρωμεν θυσίαν 
αἰνέσεως. So in every Eucharist Christ is the true priest, and the 
earthly priest is only the divinely authorized spokesman of the 
priestly body of worshippers. Similarly our prayers are offered 
‘*through Jesus Christ our Lord.” 

6. περιέχει. The substantive περιοχή means (1) the contents of 
a book, (2) a clause or passage. It is used in Acts viii. 32 of the 
passage which the eunuch was reading. Here the verb is intransitive 
and impersonal=it stands thus in writing, the best MSS. read γραφῇ 
without the article. The plural ai γραφαί is used of ‘‘ Scripture” as 
a whole and ἡ γραφή in the N.T. means a particular passage. Here 
St Peter appeals to the fact that there is written evidence to support 
his statements. 

λίθον. Three passages from the O.T. all containing the same 
metaphor of a stone are here combined together. 

(a) Ps. exvili, 22, ‘‘The stone which the builders refused is 
become the head-stone of the corner.” The Psalm was probably 
written after the return from Babylon, and meant that the kingship 
of Jehovah, though long ignored by the kings and princes of Judah 
who claimed to be the builders of the nation, has now at last been 
recognized as the true bond of union for the restored nation. This 
passage was applied to Christ at the end of the parable of the wicked 
husbandmen, Matt. xxi. 42; Mk xii. 10; Lk. xx. 17, and again 
by St Peter in his defence after healing the impotent man, Acts 
iv. 11. Here the passage is alluded to in v. 4 and quoted in full in 
v. 7. . 
(0) Is. xxviii. 16, ‘‘Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a 
stone, a tried stone, a precious corner-stone of sure foundation. He 
that believeth shall not make haste.” The passage was probably 
written at the time of Sennacherib’s invasion and meant that the 


48 I PETER [2 6— 


presence of Jehovah is the one and only source of protection for 
Judah, and that intrigues with Egypt, etc., are utterly useless. 

(ὁ) Is. viii. 14, ‘*(He shall be for a sanctuary;) but for a stone 
of stumbling and for a rock of offence (to both the houses of Israel).” 
This passage was written in the reign of Ahaz when Israel and Syria 
were invading Judah. The meaning is that Jehovah will be a sure 
refuge to those who trust in Him, but will cause the overthrow of 
unbelievers. 

Neither of the two passages from Isaiah therefore had primarily 
any direct reference to Messiah, but from the Targums and other 
Jewish books it seems clear that ‘‘the stone” was regarded as a 
regular title of Messiah, and from the application of Ps. exviii. 22 
to Christ the other passages in which the word λίθος was used in the 
LXX. came to be similarly applied. So again in 1 Cor, iii. 11 
St Paul speaks of Jesus Christ as the foundation (θεμέλιον), and in 
Eph. ii. 20 as the chief corner-stone, ἀκρογωνιαῖον, and in later 
Christian writers who traced the fulfilment of prophecy in Christ 
“the stone” is used as one of His regular titles. St Paul (Rom. ix. 
33) and St Peter both combine the same two passages of Isaiah and 
both have some common variations from the LXX.: 

(1) both read 50d τίθημι ἐν Σιών instead of ἰδοὺ ἐγὼ ἐμβάλλω els 
τὰ θεμέλια Dewy, 

(2) both read πέτρα σκανδάλου instead οὗ πέτρας πτώματι, 

(3) both omit εἰς τὰ θεμέλια αὐτῆς, 

(4) both insert ἐπ᾿ αὐτῷ after πιστεύων. 

As there are many other coincidences of thought between St Peter 
and St Paul (especially Romans and Ephesians) the natural inference 
is that the changes were introduced by St Paul and borrowed by 
St Peter. But it has been suggested that possibly a collection of 
O.T. passages, arranged according to their subjects, suitable for 
proving from the Scriptures that Jesus was the Christ, was made at 
a very early date. Certainly such collections were afterwards used, 
e.g. the Testimonia of Cyprian, where one of the chapters shews that 
Jesus was styled ‘the stone.” If such a collection was already 
extant when St Peter and St Paul wrote they may have both 
borrowed independently from it, and the same theory might explain 
other composite quotations in the N.T. 

ἐν Σιὼν, the promise was made for Israel and was first fulfilled 
in Israel by the Incarnation and so is efficacious for the new Israel 
which is the expansion and archetype of the old. 

ἐκλεκτὸν dxpoywviatov. The order of the words in the T.R. is thus 
reversed in the best MSS. as in the LXX., in which case ἀκρογωνιαῖον 


2 8] NOTES 49 


is probably a substantive, a stone that is elect a chief corner-stone 
that is held precious. The corner-stone perhaps means that which 
unites two walls; so in Eph, ii. 20 where ἀκρογωνιαῖον occurs again 
the idea is that Jews and Gentiles are united in Christ. 

ὁ πιστεύων ἐπ᾿ αὐτῷ. πιστεύειν ἐπί with the dative suggests the 
basis on which faith rests. Except in this passage quoted here and 
in Rom. ix. 33, x, 11 this construction only occurs in Lk. xxiv. 25 
and 1 Tim. i. 16. 

ov μὴ καταισχυνθῇ. In Isaiah the Hebrew is ‘shall not make 
haste,” i.e. flee in panic, won x, but the LXX. evidently read 
win x= =shall not be put to shame, 1,6. will never find his con- 
fidence belied. 

7. ὑμῖν. The A.V. renders ‘‘ unto you that believe He is precious,” 
i.e. in your eyes. The R.V. marg., ‘‘In your sight...is the precious- 
ness,” or ‘‘For you.,.is the honour,” but the R.V. text is For you is 
the preciousness, i.e. the preciousness implied in the epithet ἔντιμον 
concerns you Christians ; its value in God’s sight is for your benefit 
and accrues to you. 

amurrotew=for such as disbelieve. This is the reading of Band C, 
whereas the T,R. reads ἀπειθοῦσι: disobedient, as in v. 8. The dative 
is probably not governed by ἐγενήθη but is a dative of reference. For 
such as are disbelieving the Psalmist’s words are true. 

8. λίθος προσκόμματος. The stone of stumbling is the loose stone 
against which the traveller strikes his foot, while πέτρα σκανδάλου, the 
rock of offence, is rather the native rock rising up through the path, 
which trips him up. σκάνδαλον is constantly used of Christ as being 
a stumbling-block to the Jews. 

προσκόπτουσιν - ἀπειθοῦντες, probably both words conjointly 
govern \éyw—who stumble at the word being disobedient to it. 

εἰς ὃ kal ἐτέθησαν. (See 5. and H. Rom. ix.—xi. and Hort, 1 Pet. 
p- 123.) The words must be neither explained away nor exaggerated. 
The stumbling of the disobedient, according to St Peter, was no 
accident nor due only to their own conduct, but part of God’s primal 
purpose. The corner-stone in Zion and the men who should stumble 
at it were both of God’s appointing. For this use of τίθημι, cf. Acts 
xiii. 47; 1 Tim. ii. 7; 2 Tim. i, 11; Jn xv. 16, It is of course 
perfectly true that certain results are the inevitable nemesis attached 
to certain conduct, and in that sense it might be said that stumbling 
was appointed by God as the nemesis of disobedience. But this does 
not exhaust St Peter’s meaning. The stumbling seems to be regarded 
as not merely a secondary part of God’s purpose, conditional on man’s 
disobedience, but as part of His primal purpose. On the other hand 


I PETER D 


50 7 PETER [2 8— 


St Peter does not say that any persons were reprobated to damnation. 
To the question, ‘‘ Did they stumble in order that they might fall?” 
asked by St Paul in Rom. xi. 11, St Peter would without doubt have 
given St Paul’s answer, ‘‘God forbid, but rather through their fall 
salvation is come to the Gentiles.”’ St Peter, as we have seen, has 
throughout been emphasizing the fact that the privileges formerly 
restricted to Jews have now been extended to Gentiles, and there is 
little doubt that in quoting the passage about the stone of stumbling, 
employed by St Paul in discussing the apostasy of Israel, St Peter in 
these words eis ὃ καὶ ἐτέθησαν is briefly summarizing St Paul’s argu- 
ment, in which he shewed that Israel’s apostasy, guilty though it 
was, was designed to subserve God’s eternal purpose of love. The 
stumbling of disobedient Jews made room for the admission of be- 
lieving Gentiles, that thereby Israel in return might be roused to 
godly jealousy to value and accept the privileges which once they 
so madly rejected. 

9. St Peter applies to his Gentile readers, as the new Israel of 
God rescued from the slavery of sin, titles of honour which were used 
(1) in Ex. xix. 5 of Israel as the Covenant people rescued from Egypt, 
(2) in Is. xliii. 20 of the mission for which God was restoring them 
from Babylon. 

Just as within the nation a special body of priests was chosen to 
do God’s work for the benefit of the whole nation, so among the 
nations of the world Israel was to be the ‘‘ priestly nation” through 
whom all nations were to be blessed, and this is true also of the 
Church, the new Israel of God. 

γένος ἐκλεκτόν from Is. xliii. 20. 

βασίλειον ἱεράτευμα from Ex. xix. 5 where the Hebrew is “a 
kingdom of priests.” The LXX. evidently intended both words as 
substantives, ‘‘a body of kings, a body of priests,” so in Rey. i. 6 
and ν. 10, βασιλείαν ἱερεῖς τῷ θεῷ. Here however βασίλειον is almost 
certainly an adjective and the old Hebrew expression which meant a 
priestly kingdom or nation is changed into ‘‘a royal priesthood or 
body of priests.”” The epithet royal here probably means priests in 
the service of the king, not as in the Apocalypse that Christians are 
kings as well as priests. 

ἔθνος. λαός. Two different Hebrew words were applied to Israel. 
ἔθνος describes their position as one of the nations of the world, who 
were distinguished from others by being consecrated (ἅγιον) to God. 
λαός describes them as the covenant people of God. In the Epp. 
ἔθνος is nowhere else used of Israel, but in the Gospels and Acts it is 
used of Israel in speaking to foreigners like Pilate or Felix, or of 


2 9] NOTES 51 


the conduct of foreigners towards Israel. In Jn xi. 50 Caiaphas 
says, “Τὸ is expedient that one man should die for the people (λαός) 
and not that the whole nation (ἔθνος) should perish,” where ἔθνος 
might mean the population as distinct from the community or the 
civil organization, that the Romans would deprive them of all 
national existence. 

λαὸς εἰς περιποίησιν. The sense though not the actual Greek 
phrase is borrowed from Ex. xix. 5 where the Hebrew is ‘‘ Ye shall 


be a peculiar possession,” map, but the LXX. rendering is λαὸς 


περιούσιος, Which is the phrase used by St Paul in Tit. ii. 14, ‘‘ Christ 
gave himself on our behalf that he might ransom us from all lawless- 
ness and purify for himself a peculiar people, zealous for good works.” 


The same Hebrew word nbap is however translated εἰς περιποίησιν 


in Mal. iii. 17, ‘‘They shall be to me in the day which I make 
(1.6. my appointed day) for a special possession” (not as A.V. ‘they 
shall be mine in the day that I make up my jewels”). The substi- 
tution of εἰς περιποίησιν for the LXX. περιούσιος would be further 
suggested to St Peter by Is. xliii. 21, a passage from which he has 
already borrowed the words γένος ἐκλεκτόν. There Israel are described 
by God as λαόν μου ὃν περιεποιησάμην Tas ἀρετάς μου διηγεῖσθαι. The 
same verb περιποιεῖσθαι is used of God purchasing the Church in 
Acts xx. 28 and of men losing their lives in attempting to secure 
them as their own, Lk. xvii. 33. The substantive περιποίησις is 
used of God’s rights of possession over the Church in Eph. i. 14. 
Elsewhere it is used of winning (a) salvation, 1 Thess. v. 9, (b) glory, 
2 Thess. ii. 14, (c) life, Heb. x. 39. 

ἀρετάς. In classical Greek ἀρετή originally meant excellence or 
eminence of any kind, but gradually it came to be used of moral 
excellence only, i.e. virtue. In the passage which St Peter is quoting, 
Is. xliii. 21, and in three other passages it represents the Hebrew 
‘‘praise.” In the two other passages where it occurs in the O.T. it 
represents the Hebrew ‘‘ glory” or ‘‘ majesty.” Here the idea is that 
Christians are intended to manifest God’s own excellencies by their 
lives, ef. Matt. v. 16, ‘‘that they may see your good works and glorify 
your Father.” The only other places where ἀρετή occurs in the N.T. 
are Phil, iv. 8 and 2 Pet. i. 5. 

ἐκ σκότους καλέσαντος. Used of the admission of Gentiles, Acts 
xxvi. 18; Eph. v. 8; Col, i. 13. So here St Peter almost certainly 
refers to the transition from heathenism. 

θαυμαστόν. God’s light is described as ‘‘ marvellous” because by 
it our eyes are opened to see ‘‘ wondrous things.” 

D2 


ἐδ’ I PETER [2 10— 


10. οὐ λαὸς... οὐκ ἠλεημένοι. In Hos. i. 6, 7, ii. 23, the faithless- 
ness of Israel to Jehovah her true bridegroom is described under 
the figure of the prophet’s faithless wife who deserts him for false 
paramours. The children are therefore called by symbolical names, 
Lo-ammi=‘‘not my people” and Lo-ruhamah=‘‘ not having ob- 
tained mercy.” But when their mother is at last restored their 
names are changed to Ammi and Ruhamah. In Hosea the words 
refer to Israelites but in Rom. ix. 25 St Paul applies the passage to 
the admission of the Gentiles. So here St Peter, probably borrowing 
from St Paul, is almost certainly referring to the admission of 
Gentiles to be the new ‘‘Israel of God.” : 

οὐκ HAenpévor...edendévres. The perfect participle denotes the long- 
continued state in which they had lived as heathen, while the aorist 
refers to the crisis of their conversion, though of course the effects of 
that mercy are still continuous. Neither St Peter nor St Paul mean 
that the heathen or the unconverted Jew had no share in God’s 
mercy. The reference is to the special mercy of the gift of the 
Gospel. 

The Second Section of the Epistle, ii, 11—iv. 11, contains an 
exhortation to renounce heathen principles of conduct and adopt 
Christian principles, which will necessarily transform the various 
social relationships and duties of life. 


A. EXXHORTATION TO PURITY OF MOTIVE AND CONSEQUENTLY TO PURITY 
OF LIFE IN THE PRESENCE OF HEATHEN. ii. 11, 12. 


11 If you are God’s chosen people, citizens of heaven, your present 
surroundings are not your home; you are only, as it were, sojourners 
in a foreign land, living among strangers; I beseech you to remember 
this. In your own hearts you will find mutinous desires of the flesh 

12 which make war against your true self. In your dealings with the 
Gentiles around you you must take care that your behaviour. is 
deserving of respect so that, in the very matter in which they speak 
against you as a ‘‘pestilent sect,” they may at length (under the 
pressure of a day of visitation, when God in judgment brings the 
truth home to them) by the recollection of (ἐκ) your good works have 
their eyes opened to be beholders indeed and so come to give glory 
to God. ) 
> B. Sooran puties. ii. 13—iii. 12. 

13 This warfare against heathen principles of living does not mean 
the subversion of the necessary bonds of society. Rather it deepens 
and intensifies them. God has instituted various forms of authority 
among men, and to those you must submit yourselves for His sake. 


NOTES 53 


(a) To ctvm ruteRs, whether it be to the king as supreme ruler 14 
in the Empire or to subordinate magistrates, as officers sent (by God) 
through the agency of the king to execute vengeance upon evil-doers 
but to commend well-doers. For this is one of the ways of God’s 15 
own working. His will is that by well-doing men should silence the 
purblind calumnies of the senseless sort of men who attack them. 
In submitting to such institutions you will not be reverting to the old 16 
yoke of slavery from which you were ransomed. You will only be 
obeying “ the law of liberty.” Instead of acting like men who misuse 
their liberty as a cloak of their malice, you will be acting as the bond- 
servants of God (‘“‘whose service is perfect freedom”). It is your 17 
duty in general to honour all men, in particular to love your brethren 
in Christ, to fear God, to honour the king. 

The same principle applies to all your social relationships. 18 

(b) HouszHotp staves (despite the fact that in Christ there is 
neither bond nor free) must, with a full sense of the fear of God, sub- 
mit themselves to their masters, and that not only to those who are 
good and considerate but also to those who are unfair or capricious. 
For if a man recognizes his service as part of God’s discipline for him, 19 
and for that reason submits to the hardships of unjust treatment, 
God will approve (or thank him for) his conduct. I say ‘‘unjust 20 
treatment” for there is nothing heroic in submitting to be buffeted 
for actual faults. But if you have to suffer in spite of doing good 
work and bear it patiently, such conduct does find favour with God 
(or even His ‘* Well done”), because you will be responding to God’s 21 
call which was to follow Christ. He also suffered on your behalf, 
and in all His sufferings He left you an outline sketch to fill in by 
following in the track of His footsteps. He was the ideal sufferer 22 
described in Is, liii,, ‘‘ He did no sin,” ‘‘ No deceit was found in His 
mouth.” When I saw Him being reviled He was not reviling in 23 
reply. When He was being ill-treated He was not threatening 
vengeance. No, He was all through committing His cause to God 
whose verdict is always just (however unjust man’s sentence may be). 

In His own Person “ He bore our sins.’”? When His Body was offered 24 
up upon the Cross our sins “laid upon Him” were included in it. 
Sins therefore ought to find no place in us. Christ died as our sin- 
bearer in order that we might regard ourselves as dead to sin and 
break off all connexion with sins and live (as risen with Him) to 
righteousness. By His precious scars you Gentiles were healed. For 
the prophet’s words are true of you. You were straying like lost 25 
- sheep, but now in your conversion you returned to the good Shepherd, 
who was all along watching over your souls though you knew it not. 


54 I PETER | [2 11— 


11. Having described the high privileges of the new Israel of 
God, St Peter proceeds in this second section of the Epistle to draw 
various moral lessons from them, In vv. 11 and 12 he describes the 
personal duty of the Christian as regards self-conquest, remembering 
the influence which his life will have upon others. 

ἀγαπητοί only occurs again in St Peter in iv. 12 at the beginning 
of the third section of the Epistle, but it is common in other books, 

παροίκους kal παρεπιδήμους. The same two ideas have already 
been presented in i. 1 παρεπιδήμοις and in i. 17 παροικίας. In classical 
Greek πάροικος means ‘‘a neighbour” and μέτοικος is the word for a 
resident alien which is the Biblical sense of πάροικος. In Hebrew two 
words were used for foreign sojourners, 

(a) “3 (Gér), i.e. one who comes as a guest, is generally trans- 


lated προσήλυτος, which originally merely meant an immigrant but 
eventually was used of foreigners who adopted the Jewish faith, 
‘‘a proselyte,” but eleven times it is translated πάροικος. 

(b) win (Téshav) or settler was generally used of temporary 
residents. It is always translated πάροικος, except in three passages 
where δ and win occur together. In two of these it is translated 


παρεπίδημος, and πάροικος is transferred to “3. 


In Gen. xxiii. 4 Abraham in asking leave to purchase a burial 
place says, “1 am a stranger (πάροικος) and a sojourner (παρεπίδημος) 
with you,” and in Ps. xxxix. 12 man’s life on earth is described as 
that of a “stranger and sojourner.”’ So in Heb. xi. 13 the patriarchs 
are shewn to have described themselves as ‘strangers and sojourners,” 
not with reference to the old home from which they had migrated but 
because they desired a heavenly fatherland. 

σαρκικῶν. The flesh is here used, as in St Paul, in a bad sense 
as opposed to the spirit. The flesh is not however regarded as being 
in itself bad. It is ‘‘a good servant but a bad master.” Fleshly 
desires include selfishness, envy, etc., as well as such things as 
fornication or drunkenness, cf. Gal. v. 19 ff. 

alrives=such as by their very nature. 

στρατεύονται. These fleshly desires are described as mutineers 
raising an insurrection against the true self. ψυχή in the N.T. does 
not mean ‘‘ soul” in the modern sense of the word, i.e. the highest 
element in man. Originally it meant ‘‘ life” and then the ‘‘ true 
self” of a man, of which his bodily life is only a transient phase. 
The same idea of an internal warfare in man is found in Rom. vii. 23, 
(1 see a different law in my members (ἀντιστρατευόμενον) taking up 
war against the law of my mind,” and in Jas iv. 1, ‘‘ your pleasures 


2 12] NOTES 55 


that war (στρατευομένων) in your members.” (See Introduction, 
p. lvii.) is 

12. τὴν ἀναστροφὴν ὑμῶν...καλήν. καλήν is the predicate. Your 
intercourse with the heathen round you must be such as commands 
their respect. In iii. 16 the enemies of the Christians are described 
as reviling their ἀναστροφὴν ἀγαθήν. ἀγαθός denotes that which is 
intrinsically good in itself and its results, whether it is recognized 
as such or not, while καλός is that which commends itself as 
good. 

ἐν @ sometimes means “while” as in Mk ii. 19; Lk. v. 34, xix. 13; 
Jn v. 7. But here it means in the very matter in which, cf. iii. 16, 
ἐν ᾧ καταλαλεῖσθε; iv. 4, ἐν ᾧ éevifovrac= wherein. - 

κακοποιῶν. In Mk iii. 4; Lk. vi. 9 the verb κακοποιεῖν seems to 
retain its original meaning of ‘‘doing an injury,” but in the LXX. 
it has a wider meaning ‘‘evil-doing.” So also in 1 Pet. iii. 17 
{Ξε ποιοῦντας κακά of iii. 12. The adjective κακοποιός is used three 
(or four) times in 1 Pet. (ii. 14 (iii. 16, v.l.), iv. 15) and seems 
to have been a favourite term of abuse directed against Christians. ἡ 
Possibly it represents the Latin maleficus by which it is translated 
in iv. 15 by some of the Latin Fathers. Suetonius (Nero 16) speaks 
of Christians as men of a novel and pestilent (malejficae) superstition, 
while Tacitus, Ann. xv. 14, describes them as being hated per 
flagitia, and in the immediate context he includes Christianity 
among the atrocia aut pudenda which poured into Rome. Gwatkin 
(Ch. Hist. i. 76) therefore considers that foul charges of immorality, 
such as were prevalent in the 2nd cent., were brought against 
Christians even before the Neronian persecution. But κακοποιός 
is a vague and comprehensive term. It was used of our Lord, 
Jn xviii. 30, v.l., while the two thieves are called κακοῦργοι, Lk. 
xxiii. 32, a term which St Paul applies to his own treatment, 
2 Tim. ii. 9. 

ἔποπτεύοντες. The T.R. reads ἐποπτεύσαντες which might possibly 
denote coincident action with that of the main verb, but more 
naturally antecedent action=glorify God having beheld. But the 
best reading is the present participle which suggests that the ‘‘be- 
holding” is coincident with the glorifying. It is therefore doubtful 
whether τὰ καλὰ ἔργα should be understood as the object of ἐποπ- 
τεύοντες aS A.V. and R.V. 

ἐκ τῶν καλῶν ἔργων ἔποπτεύοντες does not merely mean éror.... 
τὰ καλὰ ἔργα. ἐκ denotes the result, the recollection or impression 
- earried away, and ἐποπτεύειν may have a more special meaning than 
mere ‘‘beholding.” It is not used in the LXX. but by Sym. Pss. x. 


56 | I PETER [2 12— 


14, xxxiil. 13 of God as watching over human conduct, and it is 
so used in Attic poetry; in late Greek prose the verb is used in 
a general sense of watching or beholding. There was however a 
technical use of ἐπόπτης to denote one who was initiated in the 
mysteries and Plato uses the verb in that sense, so Clem. Al. Strom. 
iv. 152, etc., uses the phrase ἐποπτεύω τὸν θεόν. 

In 2 Pet. i. 16 the spectators of Christ’s glory in the Transfigura- 
tion are described as ἐπόπται, possibly with a trace of this technical 
meaning. - 

So here the meaning may be that by the recollection of your 
good works their eyes may at last be opened and so they will 
glorify God. ἐποπτεύειν is used again, however, in iii. 2 of husbands 
being converted by beholding the chaste conduct of their wives, 
but even there the idea of ‘‘ seeing behind the scenes,” or being 
‘initiated into the secret of” would be quite appropriate. 

ἐν ἡμέρᾳ ἐπισκοπῆς. The following explanations have been given 
of the phrase (1) the day when Christians are brought to trial, (2) the 
day when their enemies are themselves judged, (3) the day when 
God’s mercy ‘‘ visits’ or comes home to them. 

In the O.T. God is sometimes described as “ visiting”? people in 
mercy, ¢.g. to deliver them from Egypt or from Babylon, and so our 
Lord weeping over Jerusalem lamented her misuse of ‘‘ the time of 
her visitation’ evidently referring to lost opportunities of blessing, 
ef. Lk. i. 78, ‘‘ The dayspring from on high shall visit (ἐπισκέψεται) 
us.” But elsewhere God is described as ‘‘ visiting” sinners with 
judgment, so ἡμέρα ἐπισκοπῆς in Is. x. 3. But frequently God’s 
judgments are themselves a means of bringing His mercy home to 
men. So here St Peter seems to anticipate some judgment of God 
which will open the eyes of heathen opponents and lead them to 
give glory to God through the memory of His servants’ lives. The 
whole passage manifestly alludes to our Lord’s words, Matt. v. 16, 
‘‘Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good 
works and glorify your Father which is in heaven,” 

13. St Peter now turns to the duties of Christians in the various 
social relations of life. He has shewn that this world is not their 
home and that they must not adopt the fashion of this world as 
their standard. But this does not imply disorder or anarchy. The 
necessary bonds of society are not to be destroyed but rather fulfilled. 
This world, though not man’s home, is his school, and its institutions 
are appointed by God. The state, the household, the family are all 
intended to be pictures of the kingdom, household and family of 
God. In loyal obedience to the Emperor and governors, in faithful 


215] NOTES 57 


service to earthly masters, in loving submission to family ties men 
may learn their true relation to-God. 

13. πάσῃ ἀνθρωπίνῃ κτίσει. This might mean every institution 
created or ordained by men, so A.V. and R.Y. ‘‘ Every ordinance of 
man,” and in classical Greek κτίσις is more frequently ascribed to 
men than to God. But in the LXX. and N.T. κτίξειν and words 
derived from it are exclusively applied to God’s work. So in Romans 
St Paul describes ‘tthe powers that be” (kings, magistrates, etc.) as 
‘‘ordained of God,” and here St Peter regards the fundamental 
institutions of human society, the state, the household, the family as 
part of God’s plan for the organization of mankind. The words may 
therefore be translated ‘‘ every (divine) institution among men.” 

διὰ τὸν κύριον for Christ’s sake, imitating His loyal submission 
to authority. 

14. Paotdct=here primarily the Emperor. If, as seems probable, 
the Epistle was written during the later years of Nero, loyalty to such 
an Emperor would be extremely difficult for Christians unless they 
regarded him, despite his unworthiness, as the representative of a 
divine institution. 

With St Peter’s language about obedience to civil rulers cf. Rom. 
xiii. 1—4. 


ὑποτάγητε... ὡς ὑπερέχοντι ὑποτασσέσθω ἐξουσίαις ὑπερεχούσαις 
εἰς ἐκδίκησιν κακοποιῶν ἔκδικος.. .τῷ τὸ κακὸν πράσδοντι 
ἔπαινον δὲ ἀγαθοποιῶν τὸ ἀγαθὸν ποίει καὶ ἕξεις ἔπαινον 


(see Introd. p. lxii). 

ὑπερέχοντι, as supreme, i.e. aS compared with subordinate magis- 
trates ; cf. 1 Tim. ii. 2. 

ἡγεμόσιν refers chiefly to provincial governors. 

8¢ αὐτοῦ. Such governors are here regarded not as sent by the 
king, but by God through the king as His agent, Cf. Jn xix. 11, also 
Rom. xiii. 1, 2, 4, 6. 

ἐκδίκησιν... ἔπαινον. The retribution on crime inflicted by the 
magistrates, and the praise which well-doers receive in consequence 
of their recognition by the magistrates is only an earthly echo of 
God’s retribution or approval. 

15. οὕτως may refer to the words which follow, viz. silencing 
ignorance by well-doing. But οὕτως is regularly used retrospectively 
to sum up some preceding statement. So here St Peter means that 
by employing civil magistrates for the praise of well-doers God 
indicates His own method of working. His plan is that His servants 
‘should silence (literally ‘‘ gag”) senseless ignorant calumnies by well- 
doing, including loyal submission to civil authority. 


58 I PETER [2 15— 


τῶν ἀφρόνων. The article might mean ‘‘ those senseless men who 
have been described as speaking evil of you,” or ‘‘ men such as are 
senseless and reckless in their charges.” 

ἀγνωσία, purblindness, is a much stronger word than dyvola. It 
describes the ignorance which cannot and will not recognize the truth. 
Cf. 1 Cor. xv. 34 only. 

16. ὡς ἐλεύθεροι. The nominative connects the verse with v. 13. 
In submitting yourselves to the institutions of human society you will 
not be reverting to the old bondage of your heathen life from which 
you have been ransomed. The service of God is ‘‘ perfect freedom”’ 
(cui servire est regnare), the freedom to do what you ought rather than 
what you like. Old institutions must be submitted to not as a bondage 
to men but as ordinances of God. 

ἐπικάλυμμα κακίας. Christian liberty affords no pretext for churlish, 
scornful, contempt towards heathenism and its institutions, rather it 
requires you to ‘‘ honour all men.” 

ὡς θεοῦ δοῦλοι, cf. Rom. vi. 22 and 1 Cor. vii. 22. 

11. τιμήσατε... ἀγαπᾶτε... φοβεῖσθε...τιμᾶτε.ς Here we have an 
aorist imperative followed by three present imperatives. The usual 
distinction between aorist and present imperatives is that the present 
is used in general precepts and the aorist in individual cases, the 
aorist denoting ‘‘ point” action and the present “linear,” see J. H. 
Moulton’s Grammar, p. 129. Sometimes, however, the aorist imper- 
ative is used in general precepts to inculcate a new duty not previously 
recognized. So in Rom. vi. 13, μηδὲ παριστάνετε τὰ μέλη ὑμῶν ὅπλα 
ἀδικίας τῇ ἁμαρτίᾳ ἀλλὰ παραστήσατε ἑαυτοὺς τῷ θεῷ, the present im- 
perative may mean, do not continue your old practice of presenting 
your members as instruments of unrighteousness for sin to use, but 
begin a new practice and present yourselves to God. But another 
explanation is, do not time after time present...but present yourselves 
once and for all to God, the aorist denoting something which is to be 
done to the end as a complete whole. So here some would explain 
that to ‘honour all men” is a new duty never realized until now, 
whereas honour to the king is an old duty which is not to be abandoned, 
although he can no longer be worshipped as a God. The objection to 
this view, however, is that love for the brotherhood, for which the 
present imperative is used, would also be a new duty not possible until 
they were admitted into God’s family. Possibly the aorist πάντας 
τιμήσατε states the Christian’s duty as a whole to be fulfilled to 
the end and the three present imperatives expand it by three general 
precepts. 

But St Peter has a marked preference for aorist imperatives which 


2 18] NOTES 59 


he uses 22 times (against 9 presents) as being more forcible, but in 
expanding his injunction he borrows a passage from the O.T. in 
which the present imperative φοβοῦ occurred and therefore he assimi- 
lates the other two imperatives to it. 

τὸν θεὸν φοβεῖσθε, τὸν βασιλέα τιμᾶτε. The words are borrowed 
from Proy, xxiv. 21, ‘‘ My son, fear God and the king,” but instead 
of coupling God and the king together with the same verb φοβεῖσθε 
St Peter treats ‘‘honour the king” as a subordinate form of the 
reverence due to God, just as ‘honour to all men”? is a subordinate 
form of that love which can only reach its highest form in the reci- 
procal love of Christians as brothers. 


18. The duty of Servants to Masters (cf. Camb. Gk. Test. 
Col. p. lxviii, ; Lightfoot Col, 317 ff.). 


Slavery was interwoven with the texture of society under the 
Roman Empire. To prohibit slavery would have been to tear society 
into shreds, and bring about a servile war with its certain horrors 
and doubtful issues. The Gospel therefore nowhere directly attacks 
slavery as an institution. It lays down universal principles which 
were ultimately to undermine the evil, but there is not a syllable which 
could appeal to the spirit of political revolution. Yet the numbers of 
the slave population were enormous, and their lot was often intensely 
hard. The slave had no recognized relationships, no conjugal rights. 
He was absolutely at his master’s disposal; for the smallest offence 
he might be scourged, mutilated, crucified or thrown to the beasts. 
When men in such a position were for the first time taught that 
‘*there is no respect of persons with God, that in Christ Jesus there’ 
is neither bond nor free,” that masters and slaves are brothers in 
Christ, they might easily have been excited to assert their liberty in 
a spirit of open rebellion or sullen discontent. St Peter therefore, 
like St Paul in Eph. vi. 5; Col. iii. 22; 1 Tim. vi. 1, instructs 
Christian slaves to regard service to earthly masters as part of their 
service to God. 

18. οἰκέται, literally members of a household so domestic servants, 
including perhaps freedmen as well as slaves, δοῦλοι, which is the word 
used by St Paul. In the Pentateuch, however, and in Proverbs 
οἰκέτης is frequently used in the LXX. to translate the same Hebrew 
word which is rendered δοῦλος in other books. In the N.T. οἰκέτης 
occurs only in Lk. xvi. 13; Acts x. 7; Rom. xiv. 4. 

ὑποτασσόμενοι. Cf. Lightfoot on Col. iii. 16, ‘‘The absolute 
‘ participle being (so far as regards mood) neutral in itself, takes its 
colour from the general complexion of the sentence,” 


60 I PETER [2 18— 


Here the participle is a virtual imperative referring back to ὑποτά- 
ynre in v. 13 (see J. H. Moulton Gram. 180 ff.). This is a very 
common use in 1 Pet. 6.9. 111, 1 ὑποτασσόμεναι, iii. 7 συνοικοῦντες, iii. 
8—9 where participles and adjectives stand side by side (cf. Rom. xii. 
9—19 with imperatives and infinitives added), iv. 8, 10 and (?) ii. 12 
ἔχοντες. 

For St Paul cf. Col. iii. 16; 2 Cor. ix. 11, 18 ; Eph. iv. 2, 8; for 
papyri see J. H. Moulton, p. 223. 

ἐπιεικέσιν (see Mayor on Jas iii. 17). In the LXX. ἐπιεικής occurs 
only in Ps. lxxxvi. 5 of God being ‘‘ ready to forgive,” and this agrees 
with the definition given in Aristotle (Hth. vi. 11) τὸν ἐπιεικῇ μάλιστα 
φαμὲν συγγνωμονικόν, and (Eth. vy. 14) it is contrasted with strict 
justice. So (Rhet. i. 13, 17) it is explained in the sense of ‘‘ merciful 
consideration’ which does not insist upon the strict letter of the law. 
In Homer it means ‘‘seemly,” ‘‘decorous” as opposed to ἀεικής. 
So Plato uses it of respectable, well-behaved people; in Rep. 397 ν it 
is applied to one who had been described as μέτριος ---ὃἃ moderate man, 
so also Thuc. i. 76. Thus in Plato and Aristotle it was used collo- 
quially in the sense of σπουδαῖος or ἀγαθός. 

In the N,T. it is twice joined with ἄμαχος 1 Tim. iii. 3; Tit. iii. 2, 
and in Jas iii. 17 with εἰρηνική and εὐπειθής. In Acts xxiv. 4 Tertullus 
begs Felix to hear him of his clemency (ἐπιεικίᾳ). In 2 Cor. x. 1 
St Paul beseeches his readers by the πραὕὔτητος καὶ ἐπιεικίας of Christ 
rather than by the ‘boldness’ of stern magisterial methods. In 
Phil. iv. ὅ τὸ ἐπιεικές may mean readiness to forego one’s rights, the 
special duty urged in chap, ii. 

So here it probably means ‘‘considerate” masters who do not 
enforce their rights tyrannically. 

Thus, although etymologically ἐπιεικής was connected with εἰκός τε 
what is fit and reasonable, its later meaning seems to have been 
influenced by a supposed connexion with elkw=‘‘ I yield.” 

σκολιοῖς. In LXX. of crooked paths or perverse persons. In 
N.T. Lk. iii. 5 (from Is. xl. 3); Acts ii. 40 and Phil. ii. 15 (from 
Deut. xxxii. 5) ‘‘a crooked generation.” Here it means unfair, 
awkward to deal with. 

19. τοῦτο γὰρ χάρις (see Robinson Hph. p. 221 ff.). Besides its 
special Christian sense of God’s free favour, especially as bestowed 
upon Gentiles, χάρις in the N.T. retains (a) some of its purely Greek 
significations, (b) the significations which it acquired in the LXX. 
as a translation of |} =favour. 


So here A.V. ‘‘ this is thankworthy,” something which meets 
with God’s ““ Well done, good and faithful servant,” οἵ, Lk. vi. 32, 33, 


2 22) NOTES 61 


34 ‘* What thank have ye?” xvii. 9, ‘‘ Doth he thank that servant” 
(χάριν ἔχει). 

R.V. * This is acceptable,” saxaathinie which finds favour with 
God, ef. Lk. i. 30, ii. 52; Acts ii. 47, vii. 46, ete. This is a very 
common meaning in the O.T. and is probably intended here. 

Sid συνείδησιν θεοῦ. A.V. and R.V. “conscience towards God,” 
but when συνείδησις is followed by an objective genitive it means 
rather consciousness of, e.g. conscious sense of sins Heb. x. 2, a con- 
scious sense of the idol’s existence 1 Cor. viii. 7 T.R. (v.1. συνηθεία). 
So here it means prompted by a conscious sense of God’s presence 
and will, cf. Eph. vi. 7; Col. iii. 23 ὡς τῷ θεῷ καὶ οὐκ ἀνθρώποις. Such 
consciousness of the watchful presence of a just God, who demands 
submission to authority from them, can enable servants to bear man’s 
injustice with patience as Christ did. 

20. κλέος occurs nowhere else in the N.T. and only once in the 
LXX., Job xxviii. 22, where it means “fame.” Here it means that 
there is no credit, nothing which men count heroic in patient 
submission to punishment which is deserved. κολαφιζόμενοι from 
κόλαφος a fist, so “ to buffet.” Cf. Mt. xxvi.67; Mk xiv. 65; 1 Cor. iv. 
11; 2 Cor. xii. 7 but it is not found in the LXX. nor in classical 
Greek. 

21. εἰς τοῦτο ἐκλήθητε. The call to follow Christ is not only to 
imitate Him in well-doing but also to share His sufferings, cf. v. 10; 
Mt. xvi. 24; 1 Thess. iii. 3; 2 Tim. ii. 11; Heb. ii. 10. 

If the Captain of salvation was made perfect through suffering the 
same process is employed by God in bringing His other sons to 
glory. 

ὑπολιμπάνων. λιμπάνειν is a late form for λείπειν, leaving be- 
hind. 

ὑπογραμμός (in classical Greek ὑπογραφή), means a drawing to be 
traced over, or an outline to be filled in and coloured, cf. ὑποτύπωσις, 
a rough model, 1 Tim. i. 16; 2 Tim. i. 13, Neither ὑπολιμπάνειν nor 
ὑπογραμμός Occur again. 

ἐπακολουθεῖν, to follow close upon, like climbers treading in the 
steps of an Alpine guide. Cf. 1 Tim. ν. 10, 24; Mk xvi. 20. 

ἴχνεσιν, cf. Rom. iv. 12; 2 Cor. xii. 18. 

22. ὃς ἁμαρτίαν οὐκ ἐδοδησν οὐδὲ εὑρέθη δόλος, ἐν τῷ στόματι 
αὐτοῦ. In the LXX. οὗ Is. liii. 9, the words are ὅτι ἀνομίαν οὐκ ἐποίησεν 
οὐδὲ δόλον ἐν τῷ στόματι αὐτοῦ. The description in Is. liii. of the ideal 
servant of Jehovah, suffering as the representative of the people, is 
* quoted by St Peter in these verses (22—24) as being fulfilled in 
Christ. 


62 I PETER [2 23— 


23. οὐκ ἀντελοιδόρει. The imperfects ἀντελοιδόρει, ἠπείλει, παρε- 
δίδου are sometimes explained as denoting the habitual attitude of the 
life of Christ as opposed to the one definite act of the crucifixion 
ἀνήνεγκεν. But more probably the imperfects describe St Peter’s own 
recollections of our Lord’s sufferings of which he claims to have been 
a witness v. 1, ‘‘ When I saw Him being reviled and threatened, He 
was all the while using no revilings or threats but was committing 
His cause to God.’ The aorists ἐποίησεν, εὑρέθη, ἀνήνεγκεν on the 
other hand describe His life and death as a whole. 

τῷ κρίνοντι δικαίως. The Vulgate reads ‘‘ judicanti injuste,” 
submitted to him that was judging unjustly, i.e. Pilate. But no 
Greek text reads ἀδίκως, and the real meaning is that Christ could 
patiently submit to man’s injustice because He committed His cause 
to the just judgment of God, ef. 2 Thess. i. 4. 

24. ἀνήνεγκεν is the word used in Is. 11], 12, ‘‘ He bare the sins 
of many,” and the numerous reminiscences of that chapter in this 
section make it almost certain that St Peter is borrowing the word 
from it, coupling with it the word ξύλον probably from Deut. xxi. 23. 
The same phrase from Isaiah is also borrowed in Heb. ix, 28, ὁ Χριστὸς 
ἅπαξ προσενεχθεὶς εἰς TO πολλῶν ἀνενεγκεῖν ἁμαρτίας. In that passage 
ἀναφέρειν seems certainly to retain something of its ordinary sacrificial 
meaning of ‘‘ offer up”’ (cf. 1 Pet. 11. 5; Jas ii. 21 ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον, 
Heb, vii. 27, xiii. 15). (In the Gospels ἀναφέρειν merely means to 
‘take up” (Mt. xvii. 1; Mk ix. 2; Lk. xxiv. 51).) So Chrysostom 
explains the words in Heb. ix. 28 as meaning that, just as when we 
offer up an offering we present our sins for pardon that God may take 
them away, so Christ offered up our sins to the Father not for judgment 
but for removal. Westcott considers that the sacrificial idea is present 
in the phrase, but explains that Christ carried to the cross the burden 
of sins (not, primarily or separately from the sins, the punishment of 
sins) and there did away with sin and sins. So here St Peter may 
regard our sins laid upon Christ as being included in the sacrificial 
victim, the Body of Christ “offered up” upon the Altar of the 
Cross. 

Deissmann (Bible Studiés, p. 88), while admitting that the word 
ἀναφέρειν was perhaps suggested to St Peter by the reminiscences of Is. 
liii. which pervade this section, argues that we have no right to assume 
that St Peter must have used it in the same sense as the LXX. 
translators of Is. liii. 12, who may have meant ‘* suffered the punish- 
ment of” as representing the Hebrew NW. In that case, says 
Deissmann, St Peter would have added ἐπὶ τῷ ξύλῳ, whereas ἐπί with 
the accusative would mean ‘‘ carry up to.” 


2 24] NOTES 63 


(In answer to this it may be argued that in Is. 1111. 11 ἀνοίσει ras 
ἁμαρτίας is the LXX. translation.of an entirely different verb 51D 
(used also in the second clause of Is, liii. 4, where it is translated 
ὀδυνᾶται), and this word does mean to ‘‘ load oneself with a burden,” 
and that burden might be described as ‘‘ carried up to the Cross.’’) 

Deissmann disputes the sacrificial meaning of ἀναφέρειν in this 
passage on the ground that the sins could hardly be described as offered 
up. He would explain the words as meaning that, when Christ “ bears 
up to” the cross the sins of men, then men have them no more ; the 
‘bearing up” is a “" taking away,” without any special idea of substi- 
tution or sacrifice. He also quotes a contract, Pap. Flind. Petr. 1. 
xvi. 2, περὶ δὲ ὧν ἀντιλέγω ἀναφερομεν [...... 7 ὀφειλημάτων κριθήσομαι 
ἐπ’ ᾿Ασκληπιάδου. The editor supplies the missing portion...wy εἰς 
ἐμὲ and the sense may be that certain debts of another person have 
been imposed upon the writer (cf. Aesch. 3. 215; Isoc. 5. 32). If 
such a forensic meaning was intended by St Peter, the meaning would 
be that the sins of men are laid upon the Cross, as in a court of law 
a debt in money is removed from one and laid upon another. We 
might compare the forensic metaphor in Col. ii. 14 where the χειρό- 
ypapoy drawn up against mankind is taken away by being nailed to 
the Cross. 

ἐν τῷ σώματι αὐτοῦ. The body of Christ is the organism through 
which His life is fulfilled. His earthly body was the instrument of 
His perfect obedience and self-sacrifice, ‘‘ A body hast thou prepared 
Me,” Heb. x. 5. “ΒΥ the offering of that body (alike in the perfect 
service of His life and the voluntary endurance of death) we have 
been sanctified,” Heb. x. 10. St Paul in Rom. vii. 4 says, ‘‘ Ye were 
made dead to the law through the body of Christ.” So here it is the 
sin-bearing victim. But elsewhere in St Paul the body of Christ 
means the organism by which His life and work are still carried on, 
viz. the Church in which Jews and Gentiles are made one. Of that 
body He is still the Head and the source of its life and growth. Into 
it Christians are incorporated by Baptism, and are sustained by 
partaking of His life. Hach has to contribute in building it up, On 
its behalf St Paul rejoices in sharing the sufferings of Christ. 

In view of St Peter’s apparent use of Kkomans and Ephesians in so 
many passages, it is certainly surprising that he shews no trace of 
this striking Pauline conception of the body of Christ. 

ξύλον is used for a gallows tree in Deut. xxi. 23, ‘‘ Cursed is every 
one that hangeth upon a tree,” quoted in Gal. iii. 13. But the 
only other passages where it is used for the Cross are in St Peter’s 
speeches, Acts v. 30 and x. 39, and by St Paul, Acts xiii. 29. In 


64 I PETER (2 2425 


Rev. xxii, 2 etc. it is used for ‘‘ the tree of life” and in Lk. xxiii, 31 
of ‘‘ the green tree.” In Acts xvi. 24 it means ‘‘ the stocks,’ and in 
the plural Mt. xxvi. 47, ‘‘ staves.” 

ταῖς ἁμαρτίαις ἀπογενόμενοι, breaking off all connexion with sins, 
being dead to them. The verb occurs nowhere else in the LXX. or 
N.T. For the dative after compounds of ἀπό, οὗ, ἀποθνήσκειν τῷ νόμῳ, 
Gal. ii. 19, τῇ ἁμαρτίᾳ, Rom. vi. 2. 

The purpose of Christ’s sacrifice, as stated here and generally in 
the N.T., is not to save man from the punishment of sin so much as 
from its power, to put an end to the regime of sin. The same idea 
is suggested in iv. 1, 6 παθὼν σαρκὶ πέπαυται ἁμαρτίαις, Christians are 
to welcome sufferings as the process by which the ideal ‘‘ death unto 
sin,” symbolized by their baptism into Christ’s death, is made real in 
the persons of His members. The same thought of being dead to sin 
as living members of the crucified and risen Lord is expressed more 
fully in Rom. vi. 1—11; cf. Gal. v. 24; Col. ii. 12, iii. 2. 

μώλωψ is the scar or wheal caused by a blow. The phrase is 
quoted from Is, 1111. 5. The slaves to whom St Peter was writing 
might find help to be brave and patient, when their bodies were 
perhaps bruised and bleeding from some cruel blow, by the thought 
that they were sharing in suffering like that by which their Saviour 
had won life and healing for them. 

25. ἦτε γὰρ ὡς πρόβατα πλανώμενοι (T.R. πλανώμενα). St Peter 
means, You Gentiles may well apply to yourselves the language of 
Is. liii. about those healed by the suffering Servant of the Lord, for 
you were indeed wandering like lost sheep, as the speakers in that 
chapter describe themselves. 

ποιμένα Kal ἐπίσκοπον. TJ'he Shepherd and overseer or guardian 
who was all along watching over your lives. You were all along His 
sheep though previously ‘‘ not of this fold,” ef. Jn x. 16, your con- 
version may therefore be described as returning to Him. 

For ποιμήν applied to Christ, cf. Jn x. 11; 1 Pet. v. 4; Heb. xiii. 
20; ef. Rev. vii. 17 ‘“*‘ The Lamb shall be their shepherd.” 

ἐπίσκοπος. The verb is used of God ‘‘ seeking out” His sheep in 
Ezek. xxxiv.11. In Acts xx. 28 St Paul tells the elders at Miletus 
that the Holy Spirit has appointed them as ἐπίσκοποι to shepherd 
(ποιμαίνειν) the Church of God. In the LXX. ἐπίσκοπος is used of 
overseers, and so it came to be adopted in the N.T. as a title of those 
who had the oversight of the Church. 


NOTES 65 


CHAPTER III 


iii. 1—12. Socran RELATIONS CONTINUED. 


The same principle of submission to authority as part of God’s 1 
will applies also to Wivzs (in spite of the fact that in Christ there 
is neither male nor female). Wives should submit to their husbands ; 
deeds speak louder than words. To be spectators of the effects of 2 
the fear of God as seen in the pure lives of their wives may silently 
win husbands, who are persistently deaf to the spoken message of 
the Gospel. The wife’s truest adornment should be not outward 3 
but within, the inner character of a heart clad in the imperishable 4 
ornament of a spirit which is placid in itself and gentle towards 
others. That is a jewel of great price in God’s estimation. 

Such was the self-adornment practised by the wives of whom we 5 
read in the ancient story of the chosen people. Their hopes were set 
on God and consequently they submitted to their husbands. Take 6 
for example the case of Sarah, whose daughters you Gentile women 
became when you were admitted to the new ‘‘Israel of God.’’ She 
obeyed Abraham and called him ‘‘ Master.’’ Such wives did 
good work, and were never scared or ‘‘flustered’’ into deserting 
the path of duty. This involves a corresponding duty on the part of 7 
Huspanps. You must appreciate the meaning and dignity of human 
life and marriage. You share an earthly home with your wives; 
you also share the same spiritual inheritance, God’s free gift of 
life in the highest sense of the word. Your wife, like yourself, is 
‘* a chosen vessel’’ of God, but she is cast in a more fragile mould 
and therefore needs all the gentler handling and the more honour. 
Any lower, more selfish, more sensual view of marriage will be a 
hindrance to your prayers. 

To sum up mutual duties in general. All of you must strive to g 
be of one mind. Feel for one another, love one another as brothers 
in Christ, be tender-hearted, be humble-minded. Do not requite evil 9 
with evil or abuse with abuse. Rather bless your revilers, for the 
inheritance of blessing is the end and object of your calling as 
Christians. As the Psalmist says, A man who has made up his mind 10 
to love life and see good days must check his tongue from what is 
evil and his lips from uttering anything deceitful. He must turn 11 
aside from evil and do good. He must seek peace and follow it up. 
So, and so only, can he attain true life, true happiness, for the eyes 12 
-of the Lord are over the righteous and His ears are open to their 
prayers, but the face of the Lord is against them that do evil. 


I PETER EK 


66 I PETER isi 


iii. 1—6. The duty of Christian wives. 


1. ὁμοίως. In accordance with the same principle of submission 
to God’s ordinances for mankind. The wife, like the slave, was raised 
to new dignity by the Gospel; and, especially in cases where the 
husband remained a heathen while the wife had become a Christian, 
the duty of submission to marital authority needed to be consecrated 
and ennobled by its recognition as part of God’s will. 

In Eph. v. 22—24 St Paul regards marriage as the earthly picture 
of the union between Christ and the Church. The husband’s duty 
therefore is loving self-sacrifice and the wife’s is reverent submission. 

St Peter however shows no trace of this among the thoughts which 
he borrows from Ephesians. In Col. iii. 18 St Paul merely describes 
the submission of wives to their own husbands as “ fitting in the 
Lord.’’ In 1 Cor. vii. he urges a Christian wife not to seek separation 
from a heathen husband if he is willing to live with her in peace, 
and one reason for this is that she may be the means of converting 
her husband. 

τοῖς ἰδίοις ἀνδράσιν. The insertion of ἰδίοις here and in Eph. v. 22 
and Tit. ii. 5 is not an implied warning against unfaithfulness, but 
states the husband’s claim. ‘‘ Submit because they are bound to you 
by special ties.’ 

Deissmann, Bib. Stud. p. 123, argues that in the LXX. ἔδιος is often 
used to translate the possessive pronoun (suffix) and sometimes where 
* the Heb. has no possessive at all. So in late Greek and Inscriptions, 
etc., it is used merely as equivalent to ἑαυτοῦ or ἑαυτῶν, cf. 1 Cor. vii. 2. 
But J. H. Moulton, Gram. p. 87ff., thinks that the sense of ‘‘ own’”’ 
is retained in many passages in the N.T. 

ἀπειθοῦσιν τῷ λόγῳ. The same phrase was used in ii. 8, ἀπειθεῖν 
implies more than mere disbelief (ἀπιστία). It is used in the LXX. 
to represent Hebrew words meaning to despise or to rebel. So here 
some husbands are described as deliberately setting themselves against 
the truth. 

κερδηθήσονται.. The future indicative is read by the best MSS. 
instead of the subjunctive in the T.R. There are several instances 
of a future indicative after iva in the N.T. (see Winer-Moulton Gram. 
Ῥ. 361), sometimes in the same sentence with a subjunctive, e.g. 
Rey. xxii. 14. The indicative cannot, however, be pressed as implying 
a more certain result than the subjunctive. 

dvev Adyov. A.V. and R.V. without the word. The absence 
of the article however denotes some distinction from τῷ λόγῳ in 
the preceding clause. The meaning is that deeds speak louder than 


3 6] NOTES 67 


words, and the constant spectacle of the wife’s conduct will be a silent 
witness to the truth of Christianity, with the power to win over the 
husband without any spoken testimony or argument. For κερδαίνειν 
of winning a person, cf. Mt. xviii. 15 and 1 Cor. ix. 19. 

2. ἐποπτεύσαντες, see note on ii. 12. The idea of seeing behind 
the scenes would aptly describe the husband’s opportunities of ob- 
serving his wife’s character. But it may mean merely looking on 
at a spectacle. 

ἐν φόβῳ might refer to the reverence of the wife for her husband, 
ef. Eph. v. 33. More probably however it means the fear of God, as 
also in ii. 18 where slaves are to submit to their masters ἐν παντὶ 
φόβῳ, cf. i. 17, iii. 15; Eph. v. 21; Col. iii. 22; 2 Cor. v. 11, vii. 1. 

3. We have a similar description of true and false adornment for 
women in 1 Tim. ii. 9—10. 

χρυσία is often used of gold ornaments, 1 Tim. ii. 9 ; Rev. xvii. 4, 
xviii. 16. 

κόσμος is used in the LXX, in the sense of ornament but only here 
in the N.T. 

4. ὁ κρυπτὸς ἄνθρωπος, cf. Rom. vii. 22 τὸν ἔσω ἄνθρωπον. 

ἄνθρωπος does not mean man as opposed to woman but is ἃ 
neutral term, like homo. Here it means the inner character, cf. τὸν 
καινὸν ἄνθρωπον... τὸν παλαιὸν ἄνθρωπον, Eph. iv. 22—24. 

ἐν τῷ ἀφθάρτῳ. Probably a neuter adjective used as a substantive 
=the incorruptible apparel. 

ἡσύχιος is used in Is. lxvi. 2 of ‘‘a contrite spirit.’ Here it 
means tranquil as opposed to restless, fussy, or perturbed. Only in 
1 Tim. ii. 2, a tranquil (ἤρεμον) and quiet (ἡσύχιον) life. The sub- 
stantive ἡσυχία is used of silence in Acts xxii. 2; 1 Tim. ii. 11, and of 
quietness in 2 Thess. iii. 12 as opposed to restless excitement. 

Bengel distinguishes pais as meaning ‘‘ qui non turbat,’’ ἡσύχιος 
‘* qui turbas aliorum, superiorum, inferiorum, aequalium fert placide.’? 
Also πραὔς, he says, refers to feelings, ἡσύχιος to words, look, or 
conduct. 

mpavs=mild, gentle, meek as opposed to self-seeking and ag- 
gressive, cf. Mt. v. 5, xi. 29, xxi. 5. 

πολυτελές. Such an ornament is like a costly jewel in God’s 
estimation, cf. Mk xiv. 3; 1 Tim.ii.9. In the LXX. it is used of 
gold and precious stones. 

δ. αἱ ἅγιαι γυναῖκες perhaps= women of the chosen people. 

. 6. κύριον καλοῦσα. The only passage where Sarah is actually 
described as calling Abraham her ‘‘lord’’ is in Gen. xviii. 12, 
but St Peter is referring to her habitual attitude towards Abraham. 


E 2 


68 I PETER [3 6— 


ἧς ἐγενήθητε τέκνα. Those who regard the epistle as addressed to 
Jewish readers explain ἐγενήθητε to mean whose true daughters you 
proved yourselves; but the words are much more forcible if addressed 
to Gentiles. Just as St Paul describes the Gentiles as becoming true 
sons of Abraham by sharing his faith, so St Peter describes Gentile 
women as having become true daughters of Sarah by their admission 
into the new covenant people of God, cf. Gal. iii. 29; Rom. iv. 11. 

ἀγαθοποιοῦσαι κιτιλ. These words are generally connected with 
ἐγενήθητε if (or so long as) ye do well. But if Gentile women are 
addressed they did not become daughters of Sarah by doing well. 

The R.V. margin refers them to ai ἅγιαι γυναῖκες and treats the 
passage about ‘‘ Sarah—whose daughters ye became’? as a parenthesis. 
Holy women of old adorned themselves by submitting to their 
husbands, by well-doing and by tranquillity. 

πτόησιν. R.V. text ‘‘put in fear by any terror’’ (objective acc.) 
but R.V. margin ‘‘afraid with’’ (cognate acc.). The substantive 
occurs only in Prov. iii. 25 ‘‘ be not afraid of sudden fear,’’ but the 
verb is frequently used in the LXX. of alarm or panic. So it is used 
in Lk. xxi. 9, xxiv. 37. Here it means not interrupting the quiet 
discharge of home duties by any excitement or panic. 

7. συνοικεῖν here only in N.T. but is frequently used in the LXX. 
of marital intercourse and doubtless the sexual aspect of marriage is 
specially included here as in 1 Cor. vii. 3—5; 1 Thess. iv. 3, 4. 

κατὰ γνῶσιν, cf. Rom. x. 2 and 1 Thess. iv. 5 where the duty of 
Christians with regard to gratifying the bodily appetites is contrasted 
with the conduct of heathen τὰ μὴ εἰδότα τὸν θεόν. One aspect of this 
γνῶσις is that ‘‘our bodies are the temple of the Holy Ghost.’’ 

. σκεύει. In 1 Thess. iv. 4 Christians are bidden to abstain from 
fornication and each is to know how κτᾶσθαι τὸ ἑαυτοῦ σκεῦος (lit. 
acquire his own vessel) in sanctification and honour. In that 
passage some interpret σκεῦος to mean ‘‘body,’’ that a man ought 
to get the mastery over his own body, but others refer σκεῦος to the 
wife as being an instrument for the husband’s use. St Peter how- 
ever probably regards the wife not as the σκεῦος of her husband 
but of God, cf. Acts-ix. 15 σκεῦος ἐκλογῆς; Rom. ix. 21—23 σκεύη 
ἐλέους ; 2 Cor. iv. 7 ἐν ὀστρακίνοις σκεύεσι. 

The comparative ἀσθενεστέρῳ implies that the husband and wife are 
both σκεύη. ἀσθενὴς is generally used of bodily sickness or infirmity, 
or of lack of power or robustness. But St Peter does not use the 
word in any depreciatory sense, cf. 1 Cor. xii. 22. τὰ ἀσθενέστερα 
μέλη in the body are all important (ἀναγκαῖα). 

γυναικείῳ, an adj. ‘the female.”’ 


3 8] NOTES 69 


ὡς kal συνκληρονόμοι. The καὶ emphasizes the fact that hus- 
bands share in something far better than the marital intercourse 
of an earthly home (cvvoixodyres). Husbands and wives are also 
co-heirs of an eternal life, cf. Rom. viii. 17; Eph. iii. 6; Heb. xi. 9. 

B some curs. Vulg. Arm. read ovvxdnpovduos=live with your 
wives remembering that they are also co-heirs with you. 

χάριτος ζωῆς. χάρις, ζωή, συνκληρονόμοι all refer to the privileges 
which St Peter has referred to in Chap. i., ἀναγεννήσας... εἰς 
κληρονομίαν. ..τῆς εἰς ὑμᾶς χάριτος...τὴν φερομένην ὑμῖν χάριν. The free 
favour which God bequeaths as their inheritance is life in the highest 
sense of the word (σωτηρία ψυχῶν). 

ἐγκόπτεσθαι (KL etc. ἐκκόπτεσθαι-ε οαὺ off). ἐγκόπτειν (cf. Acts 
xxiv. 4; Rom. xv. 22; Gal. v. 7; 1 Thess. ii. 18 and subst. 
1 Cor. ix. 12) was originally a metaphor from military operations, 
‘*to break up a road by destroying bridges, etc.’’ Originally it 
governed a dative of the person, e.g. Polyb. xxiv. 1, 12. So here 
some texts read προσευχαῖς but the acc. is the regular construction 
in the N.T. For the passive, cf. Rom. xv. 22. ὑμῶν might refer to 
the husbands only, that their prayers will be frustrated if any wrongs 
done to their wives cry out against them (cf. Jas v. 4). More 
probably both husbands and wives are included in ὑμῶν. 

In 1 Cor. vii. St Paul says that married persons may abstain from 
conjugal intercourse for a time by mutual consent that they may 
give themselves unto prayer. Even the lawful gratification of bodily 
appetites may tend to deaden spiritual life. But besides this St Peter 
may mean that failure to recognize their divine co-heirship will 
hinder husband and wife in the exercise of that united prayer to 
which our Lord attached special efficacy, Mt. xviii. 19 (συμφωνήσουσιν 
=utter a united voice). 

8. τὸ δὲ τέλος, finally, an adverbial expression not used elsewhere 
in the N.T. St Paul generally uses λοιπόν or τὸ λοιπόνΞ- 8}1 that 
remains to be said. The phrase does not imply that St Peter was 
intending to draw his Epistle to a close, but merely sums up the 
instructions given above about special social duties, by enumerating 
various aspects of practical ἀγάπη applicable to all alike (πάντες). 

ὁμόφρονες, likeminded, only here in Biblical Greek, but ὁμοθυμαδόν 
is frequently used in Acts and τὸ αὐτὸ φρονεῖν occurs in Rom. xii. 16, 
xv. 5; 2 Cor. xiii. 11; Phil. ii. 2, iv. 2 and τὸ ἕν φρονεῖν in Phil. ii, 2. 

συμπαθεῖς, compassionate, sympathetic, the adjective here only 
in N.T., but the verb is used Heb. iv. 15, x. 34. 

φιλάδελφοι only here in the N.T. but cf. ii. 17; Rom. xii. 10; 

1 Thess. iv. 9; Heb. xiii. 1; 1 Pet. i. 22; 2 Pet. i. 7. 


70 I PETER [3 8— 


᾿ εὔσπλαγχνοι, tender-hearted, only here and Eph. iv. 32. 
ταπεινόφρονες, humble-minded (only here in the N.T.), is used in 
Prov. xxix. 23. ταπεινοφροσύνη is used v. 5 also Acts xx. 19; Eph. 
iv. 2; Phil. ii. 3; Col. iii. 12. 

9. μὴ ἀποδιδόντες κακὸν ἀντὶ κακοῦ. So Rom. xii. 17 and 
1 Thess. v. 15. Doubtless St Peter is borrowing from St Paul, but 
the words may have been a kind of proverb and the converse ἀπο- 
δίδωσι κακὰ ἀντὶ ἀγαθῶν occurs in Proverbs xvii. 13. 

λοιδορίαν... εὐλογοῦντες, cf. 1 Cor. iv. 12 λοιδορούμενοι εὐλογοῦμεν. 
The words are an unmistakable echo of the Sermon on the Mount 
ες Bless those that curse you’’ Mt. v. 44; Lk. vi. 28, 

εἰς τοῦτο.. ἵνα. εἰς τοῦτο regularly points forward to the iva which 
follows it and not backwards to the words which precede it, see 
Jn xviii. 37; Acts ix. 21, xxvi. 16 (infinitive instead of ἵνα) ; 
Rom. ix. 17 (εἰς αὐτὸ τοῦτο ὅπως), xiv. 9; 2 Cor. ii. 9; Eph. vi. 22; 
Col. iv. 8; 1 Tim. iv. 10 (ὅτι) ; 1 Pet. iv. 6, and the same is true of 
διὰ τοῦτο followed by ἵνα or ὅπως. So here St Peter does not mean 
that Christians were called to be cursed nor to meet cursing with 
blessing, though both would be true. The object, he says, for 
which you were called is to inherit blessing, therefore it is your 
duty to bless others, cf. Mt. vi. 15. 

The inheritance of blessing is only partially ours in this life, 
ef. Mt. xxv. 34 ‘‘Come ye blessed of my Father inherit (κληρονομήσατε) 
the kingdom.”’ 

10—12. From Ps. xxxiv. (12—16) quoted in ii. 3 ““ Taste and see 
that the Lord is gracious.’’ It is a Psalm of confident trust in God’s 
protection of the righteous in spite of their constant afflictions. It 
would therefore be specially appropriate to the times of threatened 
persecution in which St Peter was writing. 

10. ὁ θέλων ζωὴν ἀγαπᾷν καὶ ἰδεῖν ἡμέρας ἀγαθάς. In the LXX. 
the words are ὁ θέλων ζωήν, ἀγαπῶν ἡμέρας ἰδεῖν ἀγαθάς. St Peter’s 
phrase must mean ‘‘ He who is determined to love life,’’ i.e. to set 
his affections on spiritual life. In another sense our Lord has said 
ες He that loveth (φιλῶν) his life (ψυχήν) loseth it’? Jn xii. 25. 

11. ἐκκλινάτω. The word is used in a bad sense, ‘ turning 
aside,’’ ‘‘gone out of the way,’’ in Rom. iii. 12 quoting from 
Ps. xiv. 3 and so often in the LXX., but in Rom. xvi. 17 it is 
used of ‘‘ keeping out of the way of’’ and so also in Proverbs. 

διωξάτω. It may need prolonged effort to overtake peace. 

12. ἐπὶ δικαίους... ἐπὶ ποιοῦντας κακά. The preposition (ἐπί) is 
the same in both cases, but in one case God’s eyes look down in love 
and in the other in wrath, cf. Ex. xiv. 24. 


8 14] NOTES 71 


iii. 13—iv. 6. Goop anp Evm ΠΟΙΝα IN RELATION TO SUFFERING AT 
THE Hanps oF HEATHEN, ILLUSTRATED BY THE SUFFERINGS OF 
CHRIST AND THEIR EFFECTS. 


13—16. Such is God’s prescribed method for those who desire to 
see good days. If only you zealously devote yourselves to what is good 13 
my injunction not to requite evil with evil will be almost unnecessary, 
for who is likely to do evil to you in that case ? 

But even supposing that such an optimistic view is falsified and 14 
you do have to suffer, not merely in spite of doing right but because 
of it, you should count such an experience a happy thing. 

Only do not fear what your enemies try to make you fear, do not 
let yourselves be troubled. Rather fear with reverence the in- 15 
dwelling presence of Christ as Lord and Master in your hearts to 
be set apart as a sanctuary which nothing must profane. Be 
ready always boldly to confess Him if any one calls upon you to 
give an account of your position and hope as Christians, not in any 
arrogant or self-confident spirit but with meekness and fear, taking 16 
care to maintain your conscience in all innocence, so that in the 
matter which provokes so much obloquy, I mean the name of Christian, 
those who revile your good manner of life as professed members of 
Christ may be shamed into silence. ; 

13. καὶ tls ὁ κακώσων ὑμᾶς. The verb κακοῦν is used of the 
Egyptians ill-treating the Hebrews Acts vii. 6, cf. vii. 19, xii. 1, 
xviii. 10. But in Acts xiv. 2 it is used of the Jews making the 
Gentiles ill-affected towards the Christians. 

Here it might mean (1) Who can do you any real harm ? cf. the 
- Litany ‘‘ being hurt by no persecutions,’’ or more probably (2) Who is 

likely to ill-treat you? In several passages St Peter seems to regard 
suffering for Christ’s sake as no more than a possibility for some 
at least of his readers, cf. i. 6 εἰ δέον, 111. 14 εἰ καὶ πάσχοιτε, iii. 17 
εἰ θέλοι τὸ θέλημα τοῦ θεοῦ. He still regards magistrates as being for 
the praise of those who do well ii. 14, and he speaks hopefully of 
influencing opponents by good works, silencing the ignorance of 
senseless men by well-doing and making them ashamed iii. 16. 
ἐὰν τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ ζηλωταὶ γένησθε. If ye prove yourselves enthu- 
_siasts for what is good. ζηλωταί is the reading of the best texts for 
μιμηταὶ imitators T.R. The word is used in 1 Cor. xiv. 12 ζηλωταὶ 
πνευμάτων, Tit. ii. 14 καλῶν ἔργων, Acts xxi. 20 νόμου, Gal. i. 14 τῶν 
πατρικῶν παραδόσεων. - In Lk. vi. 15, Acts i. 13, it is used of Simon 
' the Zealot or Canaanite. 
14. εἰ καὶ πάσχοιτε. The καὶ throws the emphasis upon the words 


72 I PETER [3 14— 


which follow, e.g. 1 Cor. vii. 21 εἰ καὶ δύνασαι ἐλεύθερος γενέσθαι Means 
‘if you do have the chance of obtaining your freedom.’’ So here 
the meaning is ‘‘If after all you should be called upon to suffer”’ 
in spite of what I have said as to its improbability. 

εἰ with an optative expresses a contingency which is regarded as 
being quite uncertain. It is very rare in the N.T. (see J. H. Moulton 
Gram. p. 196), and, except in passages which are virtually oratio 
obliqua (Acts xx. 16, xxvii. 39, xxiv. 19, etc.), it occurs only here 
and in v.17, and 1 Cor, xiv. 10, xv. 37, ef réxo.=perhaps. This 
passage is evidently based upon our Lord’s words Mt. v. 10 ‘‘ Blessed 
are they that are persecuted for righteousness’ sake. ”’ 

τὸν δὲ φόβον αὐτῶν x.t.d. ‘‘Fear not their fear neither be troubled, 
but sanctify in your hearts Christ as Lord.’’ The quotation is taken 
from Is. viii. 12, 13 where the prophet is instructed by God not to 
share in the general panic caused by the invasion of Judah by Israel 
and Syria in the reign of Ahaz. The presence of the Lord of Hosts 
is the one true object of reverence and of fear, of reverence because 
He is a sanctuary or place of asylum to those who trust Him, of fear 
because He is a stone of stumbling to the disobedient (cf. ii. 8). So 
St Peter bids his readers not to admit thoughts of terror with which 
their persecutors try to inspire them, but to set up Christ as the one 
object of reverent fear, the Lord and Master in their hearts. 

In the LXX. τὸν φόβον αὐτῶν probably means the fear which others 
feel, i.e. the general panic, though some would explain it to mean 
‘*that which they worship’’ i.e. heathen Gods. This would give a 
possible meaning in 1 Pet. if the passage refers to attempts to induce 
Christians to revert to heathenism. But more probably it means— 
their threats, the fear which they try to inspire in you. 

15. ἁγιάσατε. The verb is occasionally applied to God in the 
LXX. e.g. of Moses and Aaron failing to sanctify Him in the eyes of 
the people. (Deut. xxxii. 51.) In Isaiah it was perhaps selected 
because Jehovah is described as the sanctuary ‘‘or place of asylum 
to be consecrated as an object of fear.’’ So here Christians are to 
treat the indwelling presence of Christ, as Lord and Master in their 
hearts, as a kind of sacred shrine which must never be surrendered 
or profaned by cowardly fears or inconsistent conduct. 

τὸν Χριστὸν. The T.R., with KLP etc., reads Κύριον τὸν Θεόν 
which would mean ‘‘God as Lord’’ Κύριον being the predicate, not as 
A.V. ‘‘the Lord God.’’ In Isaiah the words are merely ‘‘ Sanctify 
Jehovah.’’ The constant transference to Christ of language referring 
to Jehovah in the O.T. is one indication of the full Divinity ascribed 
to Christ by N.T. writers. 


8 16] NOTES 73 


ἕτοιμοι del πρὸς ἀπολογίαν. The question whether this implies 
formal trial and organized persecution, as Ramsay suggests, is fully 
discussed Intr. p. xlii. The addition of det and παντὶ make it more 
probable that St Peter means that Christians are always to be prepared 
to shew their colours and give a reason for their hope whenever any 
one challenges them, cf. Col. iv. 6. 

μετὰ πραὔτητος καὶ φόβου. Meekness not arrogance or self-asser- 
tion must be their attitude towards these questioners. φόβου might 
mean respect and deference towards those in authority, but more 
probably it means fear of God as in i. 17, ii. 18. To deliver God’s 
message and champion God’s cause is a grave responsibility which 
should make them ask ‘‘ who is sufficient for these things ? ”’ 

16. συνείδησιν ἀγαθήν, cf. iii. 21. A good conscience, mens 
conscia recti, is essential if the defence offered by Christians is to 
convince their opponents. To this St Paul laid claim in making his 

defence, Acts xxiii. 1, xxiv. 16, cf. also 1 Tim. i. 5, 19. 
τς ἐν ᾧ, in the matter in which, cf. ii. 12 with which the T.R. 
assimilates this verse, reading καταλαλοῦσιν ὑμῶν ws κακοποιῶν instead 
of merely καταλαλεῖσθε. 

καταισχυνθῶσιν, may be shamed into silence. Cf. Lk. xiii. 17. 

ἔπηρεάζοντες, the word means spiteful abuse in Aristotle but is 
used of false accusations in other classical writers, and this meaning’ 
would be appropriate here, but in Lk. vi. 28 it is translated ‘‘ despite- 
fully use.’’ 

ἀγαθὴν ἀναστροφήν. Cf. note on καλὴν ἀναστροφήν, ii. 12. 

ἐν Χριστῷ, in Christ, of whom you claim to be members. 


iii. 17—iv. 6. The blessedness of suffering in the flesh, 


The interpretation suggested for this confessedly difficult passage 
may be best explained by a paraphrase of the whole section with 
illustrations from other parts of the N.T. Other interpretations of it 
will be discussed in an additional note (p. 87). 

Paraphrase. To suffer for well-doing, if the will of God should 17 
so will, is better than to suffer for evil-doing, because to suffer 
innocently is what Christ also did, thereby (as explained above ii. 21) 
leaving us an example, and to imitate Him must in any case be good. 
But the value of suffering is enormously enhanced when we consider 
the purpose and effects of Christ’s sufferings. 

(a) When His sufferings culminated in death (reading ἀπέθανεν 18 
for ἔπαθεν) it was the doing away of sin (περὶ ἁμαρτιῶν) once for all 
(ἅπαξ), cf. Rom. vi. 10; 1 Pets ii. 24, iv. 2. 


19 


44 I PETER 


(b) Death was to Him an opportunity for wider and more fruitful 
service. He Himself said ‘‘I have a baptism to be baptized with and 
how am I straitened until it be accomplished.’’ Again when certain 
Greeks desired to see Him He replied ‘‘ Except a corn of wheat fall 
into the ground and die it abideth alone, but if it die it bringeth forth 
much fruit.’’ So it was only by dying that Christ could atone 
for the unrighteous (ὑπὲρ ἀδίκων), only by dying that He could present 
you Gentiles (reading ὑμᾶς as W.H.) to God. Cf. Eph. ii. 13, 18. 

(c) The reason of this was that the death of His flesh was the 
quickening of His Spirit, a setting of it free for a new and wide- 
reaching activity. . 

(4) This activity was not confined merely to the unrighteous who 
are alive like yourselves. In His Spirit thus quickened by death He 
journeyed to the underworld. He descended into Hell there to 


20 proclaim (good) tidings to the spirits in prison. Of these the most 


21 


notorious and typical examples were the spirits of those who suffered 
in the flesh as a punishment for evil-doing in the olden days of Noah, 
when they rejected God’s long continued offer of mercy all through 
those years while the ark was being prepared. 


[In the book of Henoch (x. Ixxxix. etc. see Charles, Hschatology) from which 
St Peter appears to borrow several phrases in the Epistle, there is constant 


“reference to the Flood; and the spirits of those who were judged in this life are 


assigned a separate place in Sheol (c. 12). For the idea that bodily suffering, 
even when it is a punishment for sin, may be a factor in the salvation of the 
soul, cf. 1 Cor. v. 5, “ To deliver unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh that 
the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus”; 1 Tim. i. 20, ““ Whom I 
have delivered unto Satan that they may learn (by chastisement, παιδευθῶσι) 
not to blaspheme.”’ Also 1 Cor. xi. 32, ‘‘ When we are judged (with sickness and 
pee ey we are chastened of the Lord that we may not be condemned with the 
world.”’ 

Again in the statement that “it will be more tolerable for Sodom and 
Gomorrah in the day of judgment” our Lord implies that the inhabitants of 
those cities must not be regarded as eternally damned because they were so 
terribly judged in the flesh. For further ideas about “the Harrowing of Hell’”’ 
see additional note (p. 83).] 


(6) Inthe Flood the same water which drowned the guilty world 
floated the ark and so saved Noah and his family from perishing. 
Water was not only the means by which the defilements of the world 
were cleansed but was also the medium by which Noah and his family 
passed from the old world into the new, as it were through death into 
a new resurrection life. Thus the Flood may be regarded as the copy 
of the spiritual reality of ‘‘ death unto sin and new birth unto righteous- 
ness’’ which is now represented in Baptism. When we pass beneath 
the water of Baptism we represent the drowning of the old sinful self, 
the putting off of the filth of the flesh. But the saving efficacy of 
Baptism lies in the new birth unto righteousness, the profession (in 


NOTES 75 


answer to interrogation) of having a good conscience toward God, which 
is represented by our emerging from the water, claiming to share in 
the resurrection of Jesus Christ. 

In every case therefore suffering and death are factors in the 
termination of the regime of sin and the attainment of a new life. 
In Christ’s case we find that by dying in the flesh once and for all for 
sins (not His own but those of others) He was thereby quickened in 
spirit for new and wider service. In the case of those who perished 
in the Flood their judgment in the flesh led to their receiving the good 
tidings of Christ bidding them to live in the Spirit (cf. iv. 6). In the 
case of Noah and his family the water of destruction was the means 
of their salvation; and the same lesson of dying in order to live is 
taught in Baptism. 

(f) There remains one further thought that suffering culminates 22 
in final glory. The Lord who rose from the dead is now seated at 
the right hand of God exalted above angels, principalities and powers. 
So we too ‘‘if we suffer with Him shall also be glorified with Him.”’ 
This conception of suffering in the fiesh as a termination of the iv.1 
regime of sin, a quickening of the spirit for new service and a 
factor in attaining glory, was the armour with which Christ equipped 
Himself in His earthly life (cf. Heb. xii. 2, ‘‘ For the joy which was 
set before him he endured the cross despising the shame.’’ Heb. v. 
8, ‘‘ He learned obedience by the things that He suffered.’’) Let it be 
your armour also in meeting persecution and equipping yourselves for 
service. In your Baptism you claim ideally to have shared in Christ’s 
death, and any sufferings in the flesh which you may have to undergo 
are only helping to make that ideal a reality for you, helping to 
terminate the regime of sin, that the time which remains for you to 2 
live in the flesh should be no longer devoted to the lusts of men but 
to the will of God. I say ‘‘ the time which remains,’’ for that which 3 
is past, your old heathen days, is all too long to have worked out the 
wishes of the Gentiles, walking as you have done (emopevyévous— 
perfect participle) in wanton immoralities, lusts, wine-bibbings, revel- 
lings, drinking-bouts, and unlawful idolatries. Your heathen neigh- 4 
bours no doubt regard you as fanatics, and revile you for refusing to 
plunge headlong into the same excess of prodigal recklessness with 
them. But (like Noah’s contemporaries) they will have to render an 5 
account to God, whose judgment is in perfect readiness both for the 
living and the dead. Such judgment of the dead is perfectly just 6 
because they also received the message of good tidings, and the 
purport of the message to them was the same which God gives to you. 
Your suffering in the flesh is a call to live in the spirit. Their 


76 I PETER tae 


judgment in the flesh after the pattern of men was a call to live in 
the spirit after the pattern of God. 

17. ἀγαθοποιοῦντας, cf. ii. 15, 20. 

εἰ θέλοι. The optative is read by the best MSS. instead of the 
indicative and denotes a possible but uncertain contingency, ef. iii. 14. 

18. ὅτι καὶ Χριστός. The καί suggests that Christians are only 
called upon to do what Christ also did, namely, to suffer innocently. 
But St Peter at once expands the idea by shewing the blessed results 
of Christ’s sufferings. 

ἅπαξ means ‘once for all’’ not ‘‘once upon a time’? which would 
require ποτέ. Cf. Rom. vi. 10, ‘‘the death that He died He died 
unto sin once (épdmaé).’? Again in Hebrews ix. 26 Christ’s sacrifice 
for the doing away of sin once offered (ἅπαξ) is contrasted with the 
oft-repeated sacrifices of Judaism. 

There are numerous coincidences of thought between this section 
of St Peter and Romans vi., and the idea here seems to be that 
Christ’s death was the termination of the regime of sin, ef. ii. 24, 
ἦν. 1: 

Christ’s death was ‘‘suffering for evil-doing’’ because it did pay 
the inevitable penalty of sin, not His own but that of others. Your 
sins, says St Peter, were included in Christ’s death and it was 
intended to set you free from sin. Therefore ‘‘suffering for evil- 
doing’’ is no longer a necessary penalty for you if you are in Christ, 
but at the same time suffering for well-doing may help to make your 
freedom from sin more real. 

ἀπέθανεν is read by NAC and all the vss. and is adopted by W.H. 
and R.V. marg. instead of ἔπαθε, which is read by BKLP, A.V. and 
R.V.. The MSS. evidence is fairly evenly divided. If ἀπέθανε was 
the original reading it might be altered to ἔπαθε to match the 
preceding πάσχειν, cf. also ii. 21, iv. 1. On the other hand ἔπαθε 
might be changed into ἀπέθανε to match θανατωθείς which follows. 
Hither reading would give a good meaning but ἅπαξ suits ἀπέθανε 
best. 

περὶ ἁμαρτιῶν. Cf. Gal. i. 4; 1 Jn ii. 2, iv. 10. Elsewhere 
ὑπὲρ ἁμαρτιῶν is used. περὶ ἁμαρτίας is used in the LXX. for “ the 
sin-offering,’’ cf. Heb. x. 6, 8; Rom. viii. 3. 

δίκαιος is used as a special epithet of Christ in one of St Peter’s 
speeches, Acts iii. 14, cf. 1 Jn ii. 1, ‘‘Jesus Christ the righteous,’’ 
and Jas v. 6, ἐφονεύσατε τὸν δίκαιον may possibly refer to Christ. 

προσαγάγῃ probably means present, give access to the presence of 
God, cf. προσαγωγή Rom. v. 2; Eph. ii. 18, iii. 12. In the LXX. 
προσάγειν is frequently used of presenting victims as an offering to 


3 19] NOTES | 17 


God. So here Christ in offering Himself as our sin-offering might be 
regarded as offering us to God.-.Again in the LXX. it is used of 
presenting Aaron and his sons for the priesthood, and this idea would 
also suit St Peter’s conception of Christians as ‘‘ a royal priesthood ”’ 
ii. 5,9. But in all these O.T. passages the primary idea of the verb 
is ‘‘to bring near,’’ and in this verse the context is not sufficiently 
explicit to shew that the word is used in a sacrificial or priestly sense. 

ὑμᾶς is read by B. 31. Syr. Arm. and W.H. and probably means 
‘*you Gentiles,’’ cf. Eph. ii. 13. 

The T.R. and both A.V. and R.V. read ἡμᾶς which would include 
all Christians. 

θανατωθείς. The verb is used of the Jews condemning our Lord 
to death, Mt. xxvi. 59, xxvii. 3; Mk xiv. 55. 

ζωοποιηθεὶς is contrasted with θανατοῦν in 2 Kings v. 7, ‘‘Am 
I God to kill and to make alive?’’ In the N.T. it is used in Jn v. 21 
of God and the Son raising and quickening the dead, cf. Rom. iv. 17, 
viii. 11; 1 Cor. xv. 22;. Gal. iii. 21. Jn 1 Tim. vi. 18, T.R. it 
is used of God quickening all things. In Jn vi. 53 the spirit is 
described as ‘‘quickening’’ in contrast with the flesh, and in 2 Cor. 
iii. 6 the spirit giveth life as contrasted with the old law of ‘‘the 
letter.’’ 

In this verse the T.R. reads τῷ πνεύματι evidently meaning ‘‘the 
Holy Spirit,’’ so A.V. ‘‘quickened by the Spirit.’? For this rendering 
we might compare Rom. viii. 11. 

But here, as in iv. 6, σάρξ and πνεῦμα are contrasted and the mean- 
ing is that by the death of His human flesh the human spirit of 
Jesus was, as it were, born into a new spiritual existence. It was 
alive all through His earthly life but was limited by the restrictions 
of the flesh until it was set free by death, cf. Lk. xii. 50, ‘‘I have a 
baptism to be baptized with and how am I straitened till it be 
accomplished.’’ Even the body of the Risen Lord was a spiritual 
(πνευματικόν) body, as our resurrection bodies will be, cf. 1 Cor. xv. 44, 
but St Peter seems to regard Christ’s new spiritual activity as begin- 
ning immediately after death and even before His resurrection. 

19. ἐν ᾧ most naturally means, in that human spirit thus quick- 
ened by death and not the divine Spirit of Christ in which He had 
all along been working in the world, cf. i. 11. 

πνεύμασι is used of the dead in Heb. xii. 23, ‘‘the spirits of just 
men made perfect’’ and this interpretation is here confirmed by 
νεκροῖς in iv. 6. It naturally seems to mean that those who heard 
Christ’s message were in a disembodied state, as He himself also 
was. 


78 I PETER [3 19— 


φυλακῇ sometimes means sentry-watch but far more commonly 
prison and is almost certainly so used. here. 

πορευθεὶς naturally suggests a change of sphere and is frequently 
used of the Ascension, as in v. 22. So here it seems to refer to 
the descent into Hell, and we thus have a natural chronological 
sequence θανατωθεὶς----ζωοποιηθεὶς----πορευθεὶ----(δι᾿ ἀναστάσεωΞ) πορευθεὶς 
εἰς οὐρανόν. 

ἐκήρυξεν is constantly used of preaching the Gospel but never of 
proclaiming bad tidings. So here it probably means good tidings, ef. 
εὐηγγελίσθη νεκροῖς, iv. 6. 

20. more. The days of their disobedience are described as being 
long past at the time when the tidings was preached to them. 

ἀπεξεδέχετο is read by nearly all Greek MSS. The reading of the 
T.R. ἅπαξ ἐξεδέχετο seems to have been a conjectural reading of 
Erasmus—but ἅπαξ ἐδέχετο is read by some cursives ; drat would 
imply that the time of Noah was the only occasion when God 
exercised such patience. 

ἀπεκδέχεσθαι is used several times by St Paul of Christians waiting 
for the return of Christ etc. but except in this verse the object or 
person waited for is always expressed. 

eis ἣν is probably a ‘‘ pregnant construction’’=by entering into 
which ark, cf. Mk xiii. 16; Acts vii. 4; 1 Pet. v. 12 ete. It is not 
probably governed by διεσώθησαν (as Dr Bigg suggests who contrasts it 
with εἰς θεόν which he connects with σώζει). 

ψυχαί is used of living persons in Genesis xlvi. 22 and Acts ii. 41, 
vii. 14, xxvii. 37; Rom. xiii. 1. 

διασώζειν is used of making a person perfectly whole, Mt. xiv. 36; 
Lk. vii. 3, of St Paul being brought safely through to Felix, Acts xxiii. 
24, and of escaping safe to land, Acts xxvii. 44, xxviii. 1, 4. 

δι ὕδατος might mean merely, were brought safely through the 
water. But more probably it means were saved by means of water. 
The same water which drowned the guilty bore in safety the inmates 
of the ark. This makes the analogy with the water of Baptism more 
forcible. So in the first prayer in our Baptismal Office, ‘‘ Almighty 
and everlasting God, who of thy great mercy didst save Noah and his 
family from perishing by water,’’ the words ‘‘by water’’ should 
probably be connected with ‘‘save’’ and not with ‘‘perishing.’”’? The 
prayer specifies three instances in which God has employed ‘‘ water’? 
mystically (a) the Flood, (Ὁ) the Red Sea, (c) the Baptism of Jesus. 


Nore. For similar instances where the meaning of σώζεσθαι διά has been 
disputed, ef. 1 Cor. iii. 15 σωθήσεται οὕτω δὲ ὡς διὰ mvpds—where the sense is 
probably not saved as it were by means of fire but escape as it were through 
the fire like a man whose house is burned over his head 1 Tim. ii, 15 σωθήσεται 


8 21] NOTES 79 


διὰ τῆς Texvoyovias, which might mean that woman shall be brought safely 
through the pain and peril of childbearing—but more probably=saved by 
means of the childbearing, which ΡΣ of the penalty of woman’s sin (Gen. 
iii. 16), but by which she has attained her truest dignity, especially when it 
culminated in the childbearing by woman of the Incarnate Son of God. 

21. ὃ is omitted by N* 73 aeth. but is read by all the best 
authorities. The T.R. reads ᾧ which is found in several cursives, and 
Hort regards 6 as a primitive error for ᾧ on the ground that it is 
impossible to take ἀντίτυπον as an epithet agreeing with βάπτισμα and 
scarcely less difficult to take it with 6 as the R.V. which (water) after 
a true likeness (or antitypically). But ἀντίτυπον may be taken as a 
neuter substantive and not as an adjective, which antitype namely 
Baptism. In this case Baptism would not be the ἀντίτυπον of which 
the Flood was the τύπος, but both the Flood and Baptism are regarded 
as the ἀντίτυπον or earthly copy of the same spiritual reality, namely 
death unto sin as the prelude to new birth unto righteousness. 

ἀντίτυπον. Cf. Hebrews ix. 24 where the copies of the things in 
the heavens ὑποδείγματα τῶν ἐν τοῖς οὐράνοις, i.e. the earthly tabernacle 
and its accessories, are described as ἀντίτυπα τῶν ἀληθινῶν because 
they corresponded to ‘‘the pattern (τύπος) in the mount’’ which was 
shewn to Moses. 

In 2 Clement xiv. the visible Church in its external bodily form 
(σάρξ) is the earthly copy (τὸ ἀντίτυπον) of the spiritual Church 
(τὸ αὐθεντικόν), and Lightfoot, p. 247, explains that τὸ αὐθεντικὸν 
means the autograph letter, the original document in God’s own 
handwriting, as it were, of which the ἀντίτυπον is the blurred 
transcript. So in Irenaeus i. 5, 6 the Church is described by 
the Valentinians as ἀντίτυπον τῆς ἄνω ἐκκλησίας. Again, in the 
Apostolic Constitutions v. 14, vi. 30, vii. 25, and other Fathers, 
the Bread and Wine in the Eucharist are described as ἀντίτυπα 
of the Body and Blood of Christ. Cyril of Jerusalem speaks of 
Baptism as the ἀντίτυπον of Christ’s sufferings, while Caesarius 
describes Baptism as the ἀντίτυπον of Circumcision. Other writers 
speak of the brazen serpent as the ἀντίτυπον of Christ. 

In all these passages therefore (except Caesarius) the ἀντίτυπον 
is the copy as opposed to the reality, and naturally inferior to it. In 
this passage, however, we can hardly imagine that St Peter regards 
the Flood as the pattern (τύπος), of which Baptism is merely the 
copy, ἀντίτυπον. Therefore, as suggested above, it seems better to 
take ἀντίτυπον as a substantive. The same earthly copy, namely, 
saving by means of water, which was presented in the Flood, is again 
‘presented in Baptism. Now, as then, it represents the same heavenly 
original, life issuing out of death. This rendering enables us to 


80 I PETER [3 21 


retain the usual meaning of ἀντίτυπον. Lightfoot (Clement ii. 247) 
however regards ἀντίτυπον here as the finished work of which the 
Flood was only the rough model, τύπος. In support of this view it 
may be argued that τύπος does sometimes mean the copy and not the 
pattern, e.g. Acts vii. 43, the images (τύποι) of your gods; 1 Cor. x. 
6, 11, the experiences of Israel in the wilderness happened, τυπικῶς, 
i.e. as earthly copies of spiritual originals. Rom. v. 14, Adam is the 
τύπος of Christ. So here, it is said, the Flood, in which by the self- 
same water the guilty world was destroyed while the inmates of the 
ark were borne in safety by it, was an earthly picture (τύπος) of death 
unto sin and new birth unto righteousness, of which Baptism is the 
true expression, ἀντίτυπον. The objections to this view, however, are 
(a) that it is contrary to the general use of ἀντίτυπον ; (Ὁ) that Baptism 
is not in itself ‘‘the original,’’ but only ‘‘the outward and visible 
sign,’’ and the ‘‘means whereby we receive ’’ the inward and spiritual 
grace of death unto sin and new birth unto righteousness. 

σαρκὸς ἀπόθεσις ῥύπου. σαρκός might be governed by ῥύπου, 
putting away of the filth of the flesh, as A.V. and R.V., or it might be 
putting away of filth on the part of the flesh (subjective genitive). 

ἀπόθεσις, the substantive occurs again only in 2 Pet. i. 14, of 
‘¢ putting off the tabernacle of the body,’ i.e. death. So here it 
might be equivalent to θανατωθεὶς σαρκί, the death of the old self in 
Baptism as contrasted with the new birth, δι’ ἀναστάσεως ᾿Τησοῦ 
Χριστοῦ. But the addition of ῥύπου makes this improbable ; cf. Jas i. 
21. The meaning probably is that the saving efficacy of Baptism cannot 
be obtained by the mere cleansing of the body (such as was effected by 
Jewish ceremonial washings and circumcision), but a right attitude of 
the conscience toward God is demanded. If any contrast between 
Baptism and Circumcision is suggested here, as in Col. ii. 11, we may 
compare St Peter’s speech at the Apostolic Conference, Acts xv. 9, 
where, in arguing against the necessity of imposing circumcision 
upon Gentile converts, he reminds his hearers of the case of Cornelius, 
where ‘‘ God made no distinction between us and them, having cleansed 
their hearts by faith’’ (though their bodies were still unclean from the 
Jewish point of view). 

συνειδήσεως ἀγαθῆς. Cf. iii. 16; Acts xxiii. 1; 1 Tim. i. 5, 19. 
In Heb. ix. 14 the cleansing of the conscience from dead works by the 
blood of Christ is contrasted with the cleansing of the flesh by Jewish 
ordinances. 

ἐπερώτημα els θεόν. εἰς θεόν must almost certainly be taken either 
with ἐπερώτημα or with συνειδήσεως ἀγαθῆς and not with σώζει (as 
Bigg in antithesis to διεσώθησαν els THY κιβωτόν). 


3 21] NOTES 81 


The following renderings have been-suggested : 


(a) Prayer to God proceeding from a good conscience. 

(Ὁ) Prayer to God for a good conscience. 

(Ὁ) The inquiry (or appeal) of a good conscience toward God, 
R.V. margin. 

(dq) The answer of a good conscience toward God, A.V. 

(e) The interrogation of a good conscience toward God, R.V. 


The substantive ἐπερώτημα occurs nowhere else in the N.T. and 
only once in Theodotion’s version of Dan. iv. 17. The demand (or 
matter), viz. the judgment upon Nebuchadnezzar, is by the word of 
the holy ones, i.e. the angels. 

The verb ἐπερωτᾷν is frequently used in the N.T., but always in the 
sense of asking a question except in Matt. xvi. 1, of demanding a sign. 
In the LXX. ἐπερωτᾷν is used in Ps. cxxxvii. 3 of demanding a song, 
but as addressed to God it means to ““ enquire of”’ or ““ consult.’’ So 
in Is. lxv. 1, quoted in Rom. x. 20, ἐμφανὴς ἐγενόμην τοῖς ἐμὲ μὴ 
érepwracw. This is the only passage in the N.T. where the verb is 
used with reference to God. 

The only passage in the LXX. where ἐπερωτᾷν εἰς is used is in 
2 Sam. xi. 7 of David enquiring after the welfare (εἰς εἰρήνην) of Joab 
and the army. 

There is therefore not much support for the rendering, inquiry, 
appeal, or prayer of a good conscience addressed to God, and none 
apparently for the A.V. rendering ‘‘answer,’’ taking ἐπερώτημα as the 
thing asked for, i.e. the answer. In late Byzantine writers on law 
ἐπερώτημα is used for a ‘‘stipulation’’ or ‘‘agreement,’’ and this 
would give a good sense here, but there is no evidence for this use of 
the word at the time when this Epistle must have been written. 
Very possibly it refers to the questions and answers in Baptism—the 
‘‘interrogation ’? whether the candidates have repentance and faith, 
which virtually constitute ‘‘a good conscience toward God.’’ 
Robinson (Eph. v. 26) suggests that ἐν ῥήματι in that passage refers to 
some form of Baptismal confession. 

The confession of faith demanded from the eunuch, Acts viii. 37, 
although only a Western insertion, is at least early evidence that such 
interrogations were usual, and the original use of creeds was as a 
Baptismal profession. The usual formula was ἀποτάσσῃ τῷ Σατανᾷ; 
Dost thou renounce Satan? to which the answer was ἀποτάσσομαι. 
συντάσσῃ τῷ Χριστῷ; Dost thou join the ranks of Christ? to which 
the answer was συντάσσομαι, and then a creed was recited in answer to 
an enquiry as to the candidate’s faith. Some such interrogation or 


I PETER F 


82 I PETER [8 31-- 


examination to test whether the conscience was in right relationship 
toward God (ἀγαθῆς συνειδήσεως eis θεόν) St Peter regards as the 
necessary condition to obtain ‘‘saving’’ grace in Baptism, as con- 
trasted with a mere ceremonial cleansing of the body such as was 
practised by both Jews and heathen. Compare St Peter’s words to 
Simon Magus just after he had received the outward rite of Baptism, 
‘‘thy heart is not right before God.’? So now, even in Infant 
Baptism, the sponsors, as representing the child, are required 
publicly to acknowledge that repentance, faith and obedience are the 
necessary conditions for continuing in the state of salvation to which 
we are admitted by Baptism. 

δι ἀναστάσεως. The ‘‘new birth unto righteousness ’’ involved in 
this right relationship to God is only ours in virtue of Christ’s 
resurrection, and this is symbolized in Baptism. When the person 
baptized sinks under the water the death and burial of his old self is 
represented. When he emerges from the water he is regarded as 
rising to a new life. This idea is expanded in detail by St Paul 
in Romans vi. 3 ff. Cf. also Col. ii. 12. Possibly the same 
idea may be intended in the difficult words, ‘‘ What shall they do 
that are baptized for the dead?’’ 1 Cor. xv. 29, which some critics 
interpret to mean that in Baptism men act on behalf of their 
own dead selves; they represent their death and resurrection, and 
this becomes an acted farce if any resurrection of the dead is an 
impossibility. 

St Peter shews so many apparent traces of the Epistle to the 
Romans that St Paul’s language in Rom. vi. almost certainly 
influenced him in this section. But we have no right to assume that 
this idea of Baptism, as representing death and resurrection with 
Christ, was originated by St Paul. He appeals to it as a thought 
which must surely be familiar (ἢ ἀγνοεῖτε ὅτι, Rom. vi. 3) to his 
readers in Rome, although he had never yet preached there himself. 
Therefore it may have been a favourite theme of other Christian 
teachers, although the elaboration of it was probably due to St 
Paul. 

22. ὅς ἐστιν ἐν δεξιᾷ θεοῦ. Some MSS. of the Vulgate and the 
Latin writers, Augustine, Fulgentius, Cassiodorus and Bede, add 
the words ‘‘ having swallowed up death that we might be made heirs 
of eternal life,’’ but there is no Greek authority for this addition. 
The first part of it may be derived from Is, xxv. 8, quoted by St Paul, 
1 Cor. xv. 54, κατεπόθη ὁ θάνατος eis νῖκος. The second clause may 
be based upon 1 Pet. i. 3, ὁ ἀναγεννήσας ἡμᾶς...δ’ ἀναστάσεως ᾿Ιησοῦ 
Χριστοῦ ἐκ νεκρῶν eis κληρονομίαν..., and the phrase κληρονομεῖν ζωὴν 


8 22] NOTES 83 


αἰώνιον occurs in Matt. xix. 29; Mk x. 17; Lk. x. 25, xviii. 18; cf. 
Tit. iii. 7. Ν 

Possibly there may be a double purpose in this reference to the 
Session of Christ at God’s right hand: 

(a) That as it was to present us to God that Christ died, therefore 
the Christian who claims in Baptism to share Christ’s resurrection 
must set his affections on things above, where Christ sitteth at the 
right hand of God, ef. Col. iii. 1. 

(b) That suffering and death culminated in glory in Christ’s case, 
and the same will be true for His followers. 

The doctrine of Christ’s Session at the right hand of God is based 
upon our Lord’s application to Himself of Ps. cx. 1, “" Sit thou on 
my right hand,’ etc, It is stated in Mk xvi. 19, in St Peter’s 
speeches in Acts ii. 33, 34, v. 31, by St Paul in Rom. viii. 34, Col.. 
iii. 1, and Eph. i. 20, where there is a similar mention of the sub- 
ordination of angelic powers. Cf. also Heb. i. 3—13, viii. 1, x. 12, 
xii, 2. ' 

ὑποταγέντων αὐτῷ ἀγγέλων Kal ἐξουσιῶν καὶ δυνάμεων. B.V. 
angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him. 
Possibly, however, ἀγγέλων may govern the two substantives which 
follow, as in the Book of Henoch lxi. 10, a book of which St Peter 
seems to shew other traces, ‘‘angels of power and angels of princi- 
palities’? are mentioned among the various grades of angels. 

For ὑποταγέντων cf. 1 Cor. xv. 27; Eph. i. 22; Heb. ii. 8, all of 
which passages are based upon Ps. viii. 7, which originally described 
the sovereignty of man. 

For the exaltation of Christ above all grades of angels, cf. Eph. i. 
21; Rom. viii. 38; Col. ii. 10, and in Col. i. 16 various grades of 
angels are described as having been created by, in and for Christ. 


AppiTionaL Note A. 
The Descent into Hell. 


In the Gospels the only passage which bears upon the subject is 
the promise to the penitent thief, ‘‘ To-day shalt thou be with me in 
Paradise,’’ Lk. xxiii. 48. 

_ In St Paul we have three possible allusions to the subject: 
Rom. x. 7, ‘‘ Say not...who shall descend into the abyss, that is 
to bring Christ up from the dead ?”’ 
Rom. xiv. 9, ‘‘For to this end Christ died and lived again that 
He might be Lord of both the dead and the living.’’ 


F 2 


84 I PETER 


‘ Eph. iv. 9, ‘‘Now this, He ascended, what is it but that He 
also descended into the lower parts of the earth?’’ This 
verse might, however, merely mean that Christ came down 
from heaven to the lower sphere of this earth, and so refer to 
the Incarnation (but see Robinson, ad loc.). 


In St Peter, 
Acts ii. 27, 31, In his speech on the day of Pentecost St Peter 


quotes Ps. xvi. 8—11, ‘‘Thou wilt not leave my soul in 
Hades,’’ and shews that it was true of Christ. 
In this Epistle, 

iii. 19 states that Christ, being put to death in the flesh but 
quickened in spirit, went in that spirit and preached to the 
spirits in prison who were disobedient in the days of Noah. 

iv. 6 states that good tidings was preached to the dead in order 
that, despite their judgment in the flesh, they may live 
according to God in the spirit. 


The only N.T. writer therefore who says anything about the 
object of our Lord’s descent into Hades or of His work there is 
St Peter. We have, however, no evidence as to the source from 
which he derived his teaching. According to early Jewish con- 
ceptions there were social and national distinctions in Sheol, and in 
the second century 8.0. moral and ethical distinctions between the 
righteous and the wicked among the dead were introduced, but there 
was no idea of any moral improvement or possibility of change in the 
condition of the dead. Unless, therefore, we are prepared to treat 
St Peter’s words merely as a pious conjecture, we must believe either 
that he learned these mysterious facts from the mouth of the Risen 
Lord Himself, or that it was specially revealed to him ‘‘ not by flesh 
and blood but by the Father in heaven.’’ 

In the Early Fathers the descent of Christ to Hades is constantly 
referred to. 

In the Apocryphal Gospel of Peter three men are seen coming 
forth from the tomb, two of them supporting the other, and a cross 
following them; and the head of the two reached to heaven, but that 
of Him who was led by them overpassed the heavens. And they 
heard a voice from the heavens saying, ‘‘ Thou didst preach (ἐκήρυξας) 
to them that sleep,’’ and a response was heard from the Cross, ‘‘ Yea.” 

Ignatius (ad Magn. 1x.) says, ‘‘ Even the prophets, being His 
disciples, were expecting Him as their teacher through the Spirit. 
And for this cause He whom they rightly awaited when He came 
raised them from the dead’? (cf. ad Philad. 1x.). 


NOTES Be 


Justin Martyr (Dial. 72) quotes a passage from Jeremiah, ‘‘ The 
Lord God remembered His dead people of Israel, who lay in the 
graves and descended to preach to them His own salvation.” This 
passage he accuses the Jews of having cut out from their copies of 
the Scriptures. It does not, however, occur in any extant MSS. 
of the LXX., but Irenaeus quotes it several times (once as from 
Isaiah, once as from Jeremiah, and in other passages anonymously 
(see iii. 20, iv. 22, 33, v. 31), in the last of which he definitely 
connects the preaching with the three days between the Crucifixion 
and the Resurrection). Irenaeus says nothing, however, about the 
Jews having cut out the words, and, from the fact that he assigns 
them to two different prophets, it would seem that the words were 
not contained in the current text of the LXX. If we could assume 
that this passage was known to St Peter, he might be referring to it, 
but there is no sufficient evidence for this, and St Peter’s reference to 
those who were disobedient in the days of Noah would not be 
explained by this passage. 

Irenaeus also (iv. 27) relates a discourse which he heard from 
‘‘an elder’ (i.e. a Christian of the generation before his own) who 
had heard it from personal companions of the apostles and their 
disciples, ‘‘that the Lord descended to the parts beneath the earth 
preaching His Advent there also and declaring remission of sins as 
available for those who believe in Him; but those have believed in 
Him whose hopes were set on Him, that is, those who foretold His 
Advent, just men and prophets and patriarchs.”’ 

Hermas (Sim. 1x.) describes the apostles and first teachers of the 
Gospel as preaching to those who had previously fallen asleep, of 
whom he mentions the prophets and the ministers of God as well as 
the first two generations of mankind which preceded them. 

Clement of Alexandria (Strom. 11. 9), quoting the above passage of 
Hermas, extends the preaching to pious heathen as well as Jews, 
and in Strom. v1. 6 he says that the Apostles followed the example of 
our Lord by preaching in Hades, but, while Jesus preached there 
only to the Jews, they addressed themselves to the righteous 
heathen. 

In the Apocryphal Preaching of Thaddeus to Abgarus King of 
Edessa, quoted in Eusebius H. E. 1. 13, Christ is stated to have de- 
scended into Hades and burst the bars which from eternity had not 
been broken, and raised the dead, for He descended alone, but rose 
with many, and thus ascended to His Father. 

Tertullian, de Anima 55, speaking of the days between the death 
and resurrection of Christ, says ‘‘He descended to the lower parts of 


86 I PETER 


the earth that there he might make patriarchs and prophets partakers 
of Himself.’’ 

Hippolytus, de Antichristo 45, represents John the Baptist after 
his death as preaching in Hades that the Saviour will come there also 
to deliver the souls of the saints. 

Origen (contra Celsum τι. 43) says, ‘‘ With His soul stripped of 
His body Christ associated with souls stripped of their bodies, 
converting to Himself those even of them who were willing or those 
who for reasons which He Himself knew were more fitted for it.’’ 

In the Apocryphal Gospel of Nicodemus, the date of which is un- 
certain, but which may be based upon a second century work, the two 
sons of the aged Symeon are described as having been raised from the 
dead, and giving an account of Christ’s work in Hades, that He 
delivered Adam from the penalty of his sin, and brought the patriarchs 
from a lower to a higher blessedness, and emptied the prison house 
and set the captives free, and erected the Cross in the midst of Hades 
that there also it might preach salvation. 

Marcion accepted the descent of Christ into Hades, but, according 
to his opponents, regarding the Demiurge, the God of the O.T., as a 
different God from the God of the N.T., he maintained that the 
righteous men and prophets under the old dispensation, as being 
subjects of the Demiurge, refused to listen to Christ’s preaching, and 
only Cain and the other wicked characters of the O.T. listened and 
were saved. 

Athanasius (de Incarnatione), arguing against the Apollinarians, 
who denied that Christ had any human spirit (πνεῦμα), says that the 
Lord appeared in Hades in an incorporeal state to shew the souls 
there present the presence of His own soul as having received the 
bonds of death, so that He might burst the bonds of the souls which 
were held fast in Hades. 

Gregory Nazianzen inquires whether we are to suppose that Christ, 
appearing in Hades, did save all without exception, or did save there, 
as He does here, only such as believed. 

Cyril of Alexandria, in commenting on Jn xvi. 16, says, ‘‘ After 
three days He came to life again, having preached also to the spirits 
in prison. For thus there was the fullest manifestation of His love 
to men, I mean, in the fact that He not only saved those who were 
still alive upon the earth, but also to those who had already departed 
and were seated in darkness in the recesses of the abyss He preached 
deliverance as it is written.’’ 

Also de Incarnatione he says that the soul of Christ went to Hades 
and appeared also to the spirits there, . 


NOTES 87 


Jerome, commenting on Ephesians, says that our Lord and 
Saviour descended into Hell that He might lead with Him in triumph 
to heaven the souls of the saints that were shut up in prison. 

Augustine, in his letter to Euodius 164, argues that the prophets 
and patriarchs were already in happiness and enjoyed the presence of 
God, and therefore needed no translation by the descent of Christ to 
Hades. Others who were in the pains of hell were released, but it 
would be very rash to suppose that Christ released all whom He 
found there. But Augustine confesses himself to be very doubtful 
whether 1 Pet. iii. 19 can be satisfactorily explained as referring to 
the descent into Hell, and he suggests the possibility of its referring 
to the Spirit of Christ preaching to the world in the days of Noah. 

In Creeds the clause ‘‘He descended into Hell’’ is not contained 
in the Nicene Creed. It occurs first in the creed drawn up by the 
Homoeans at Sirmium to be presented to the Western Council at 
Ariminum 359, ‘‘ He descended into Hell (εἰς τὰ καταχθόνια) and dis- 
posed matters there ; at the sight of whom the door-keepers of Hades 
trembled.’’ 

In Western Creeds the clause first occurs in the Creed of Aquileia, 
as given by Rufinus about 400 a.p. He states that it was not con- 
tained in the Creed of Rome nor in the Eastern Creeds, but argues 
that it was meant to be included in the statement that Christ was 
buried. He quotes this passage of St Peter in support of it. 

In the Articles of 1553 the English copy runs as follows, ‘‘ As 
Christ died and was buried for us, so also it is to be believed that He 
went down to Hell. For the body lay in the sepulchre until the 
resurrection, but His ghost departing from Him was with the ghosts 
that were in prison or in hell, and did preach to the same, as the place 
of St Peter doth testify.”” In the Latin form of the article there had 
been an additional clause that ‘“‘by His descent the Lord did not 
deliver any from prison or from torment.’’ In our present 3rd article 
only the first sentence of the above article is retained, but this passage 
of St Peter is still appointed as the Epistle for Easter Eve, implying 
. that it is to be interpreted of the work of Christ between His death 
and resurrection. 


ADDITIONAL Note B own iii. 19. 


Other interpretations of this confessedly difficult passage are 

A. That it does refer to the descent into Hell, but (1) the 
‘*preaching’’ was a proclamation of condemnation and not an offer 
of pardon. The objections to this view are that in iv. 6 (which most 


88 I PETER 


probably refers to the same ‘‘ preaching’’) good tidings (εὐαγγελίσθη) is 
stated to have been preached to the dead. Also κηρύσσειν is the word 
used in the Gospels of ‘‘ proclaiming the Gospel of the kingdom ”’ 
Mt. iv. 23, ‘‘ preaching repentance’’ Mt. iv. 17, ‘‘ preaching deliver- 
ance to the captives...and proclaiming the acceptable year of the 
Lord’’ Lk. iv. 18, 19. In the Acts and Epistles it is constantly used 
of preaching the Gospel or preaching Christ, but there is no instance 
of its use for proclaiming condemnation, and it would be hardly 
intelligible in that sense here without some words to explain it. 

Or (2) that the good news was only preached in Hades to the 
spirits of the righteous, such as Abel, Abraham and other O.T. saints. 
This was a favourite idea in early writers (e.g. the Gospel of Nicodemus, 
Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Tertullian). But the context expressly defines 
the spirits to be ‘‘ those who were disobedient in the days of Noah.’’ 
There is no hint whatever that O.T. saints in general are intended, 
and ἐν φυλακῇ could hardly mean in God’s safe keeping (cf. ‘‘ The 
souls of the righteous are in the hands of God’’) nor, as Calvin 
suggested, the watch tower from which the souls of the righteous in 
Hades were eagerly looking for the advent of their deliverer. 

Or (3) that the passage does refer to those who perished in the 
Flood, but only to those who turned to God in their dyingagony. But 
St Peter makes no allusion whatever to their repentance, but only to 
their disobedience. 

Or (4) a more tenable interpretation would be to explain ‘‘the 
spirits in prison’’ as meaning evil angels whose influence was para- 
mount in the world in the days of Noah, cf. Gen. vi. 2, ‘‘ The sons of 
God saw that the daughters of men were fair,’’ etc. This seems to 
have been generally understood of immoral intercourse between angels 
and women, which caused the destruction of the world by the Flood. 
In the Book of Henoch there are constant references to this sin of the 
angels, and in Chapter lxvii. ‘‘ the angels who have shewn injustice 
and who led astray are shewn to Noah inclosed in a flaming valley, 
but the waters of judgment are a healing of the angels and a death to 
their bodies.’’ St Peter seems to shew traces of the Book of Henoch 
in other passages and there is some slight similarity between this 
description in Henoch and St Peter’s words, iv. 6 ‘‘ judged in the flesh 
after the pattern of men but living in the spirit after the pattern of 
God.’’ St Jude, who quotes the Book of Henoch by name, says, v. 6, 
‘*Angels which left their proper habitation, he hath kept in ever- 
lasting bonds under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.’’ 
But this would give no support to the view that the spirit of Christ 
preached to them during His descent into Hell. 


NOTES 89 


B. Another interpretation, supported in one passage by Augustine 
and also by Aquinas and Bishop Pearson, is that the passage does not 
refer to the descent into Hell at all, but to the preaching of the Spirit 
of Christ in the world in the preaching of Noah. Ini. 11 the Spirit 
of Christ is described as working in the prophets of the O.T., and it is 
true that it was by the indwelling Spirit of Christ that Noah was 
a preacher (κήρυξ) of righteousness. 

But the objections to this view are: 


(1) That it destroys the natural sequence of thought in the 
passage, in which θανατωθείς, ζωοποιηθείς, πορευθείς, ἐκήρυξε Seem most 
naturally to describe successive stages in the work of Christ, whereas 
this view would refer the ‘‘ preaching’’ to the distant past. 

(2) πορευθείς like πορευθεὶς εἰς οὐρανὸν in 22 suggests the idea of 
a ‘‘journey’”’ or change of sphere such as the descent into Hades 
rather than the omnipresent work of Christ in the world before the 
Incarnation. At the same time we must not introduce too materialistic 
ideas of space in dealing with the unseen world either of Hades or of 
Heaven. 

(3) The recipients of the proclamation are described as πνεύμασιν 
ἐν φυλακῇ and this can hardly mean ‘‘ those who were living men at 
the time when they received the message but are now spirits in the 
prison-house of Hades.’’ Nor is it likely that the contemporaries of 
Noah in their lifetime would be described as ‘‘spirits confined in 
the prison-house of sin and unbelief or in the prison-house of the 
body.’’ 

(4) The spirit in which Christ preached is identified with that in 
which He was quickened by the death of His flesh, and thus most 
naturally means His human spirit—whereas His work in the world in 
the days of Noah could only be that of His divine Spirit. 


go I PETER [4 ἐξ 


CHAPTER IV 


1. οὖν sums up the various lessons drawn from the sufferings of 
Christ in the preceding verses iii. 18—22, that suffering in the flesh 
is (a) a termination of the regime of sin, (b) an opportunity for new 
and wider service in the spirit, (c) the prelude to future glory. 

παθόντος σαρκὶ, refers to ἀπέθανεν, θανατωθεὶς σαρκὶ in iii. 18. 

τὴν αὐτὴν ἔννοιαν ὁπλίσασθε, arm yourselves with the same attitude 
of mind towards suffering with which Christ armed Himself to face 
suffering and death, cf. Heb. xii. 2 ff.; Phil. ii. 5 ff. 

ἔννοια only occurs again in Heb. iv. 12 where it refers to the action 
of the reason as opposed to ἐνθύμησις the action of the affections. 

ὁπλίζειν occurs nowhere else in the N.T. but καθωπλισμένος is used 
of ‘‘the strong man armed’’ Lk. xi. 21, and the Christian’s armour is 
referred to in Eph. vi. 11; 1 Thes. v. 8; Rom. xiii. 12. 

ὅτι might be translated that =arm yourselves with the thought that, 
but more probably it means because. 

ὁ παθὼν σαρκὶ πέπαυται ἁμαρτίαις. Bigg explains this to mean 
‘‘he that in meekness and fear hath endured persecutions, rather than 
join in the wicked ways of the heathen, can be trusted to do right; 
temptation has manifestly no power over him.’? He denies any 
connexion between this passage and St Paul’s words, Rom. vi. 7 6 yap 
ἀποθανὼν δεδικαίωται ἀπὸ τῆς ἁμαρτίας. In Romans St Paul is borrowing 
a Rabbinic formula, ‘‘ When a man is dead he is free from the law 
and the commandments.’’ Delitzsch describes this as a well-known 
locus communis or stock phrase, and in this case St Peter’s language 
might be independent of St Paul’s. But this is hardly possible in 
view of the numerous coincidences with Romans in other parts of the 
Epistle, and a careful comparison shews that St Peter is following 
the same line of thought as St Paul. St Paul’s argument is that in 
Baptism the Christian professes to have shared in Christ’s death and 
resurrection. Now Christ died to sin once and for all (ἐφάπαξ). He is 
no longer under the dominion of death. He lives unto God. So the 
baptized Christian is ideally dead to the regime of sin. Death has 
cancelled the old bonds of slavery. If sin tries to reclaim him as his 
‘slave, sin will lose his suit on the ground that the slave is dead. He 
is acquitted against the claims of sin and is therefore bound to live 
unto God and not revert to the old life of sin. 


4 3] NOTES gt 


Similarly St Peter has just described Christ as having died (or 
suffered) for sins once (ἅπαξ) to present us to God (cf. ii. 24, ‘‘who 
himself bare our sins in his body upon the tree that we having died 
(ἀπογενόμενοι) unto sins might live unto righteousness’’). His death 
in the flesh was the quickening of His spirit for new service to God 
with whom He now reigns in glory. Then, having shewn how the Flood 
symbolized the termination of the old guilty world and the salvation 
of Noah’s family for a new and purified world, St Peter describes the 
same putting off of defilement and resurrection to live with a good 
conscience toward God as being symbolized by Baptism. That is 
the ideal to which Christians are pledged in Baptism, but it is an ideal 
which needs to be realized by painful efforts and watchful prayer, so 
long as they still live in the flesh. Bodily sufferings, instead of being 
resented as a hardship and a hindrance, should be welcomed as a factor 
in emancipating man from the thraldom of sin and enabling him to 
live unto God in the spirit. Though they still have to live in the 
flesh their life must no longer be regulated by the wayward desires of 
men but by the will of God. ‘ 

2. εἰς τὸ may be taken (a) with ὁπλίσασθε in order that ye should 
no longer live, etc. as R.V., or (b) as A.V. and R.V. marg. with 
πέπαυται that he should no longer live, etc. 

ἐπιθυμίαις, the many variable lusts of men are contrasted with the 
single unvarying purpose of God. So Heracleon ap. Origen on 
Jn tom. xx. 24 says that the devil has not θέλημα but ἐπιθυμίαι. 

βιῶσαι. Nowhere else in the N.T. but cf. Job xxix. 18, with an 
accusative, and absolutely in Prov. vii. 3. Biwo1s=manner of life 
Acts xxvi. 4. 

ἔπίλουπον, here only in N.T. 

8. ἀρκετὸς γάρ. The γάρ explains ἐπίλοιπον, I say ‘‘ what remains 
of your life ’’ for the sinful past has been all too long. 

βούλημα τῶν ἐθνῶν. The T.R. reads θέλημα as in the previous 
verse of the will of God. The distinction between βούλημα and 
θέλημα, like that between βούλεσθαι and θέλειν, is somewhat disputed. 
θέλημα is much more common than βούλημα and is constantly used 
of the will of God, though it is also used of the will of men or of the 
flesh, while βούλημα is used of God in Rom. ix. 19 and βούλεσθαι in 
Heb. vi. 17; Jas i. 18; 2 Pet. iii. 9, while βουλή is several times 
used of God, and in Eph. i. 11 we have κατὰ τὴν βουλὴν τοῦ θελήματος. 
The predominant N.T. usage seems to be that θέλειν denotes the will 
which proceeds from character or inclination, while βούλεσθαι denotes 
more deliberation. For the two words occurring together, see Mt. i. 
19, Ἰωσὴφ... μὴ θέλων αὐτὴν δειγματίσαι ἐβουλήθη λάθρᾳ ἀπολῦσαι αὐτήν, 


92 I PETER [4 3— 


1 Tim. v. 12 and 14, γαμεῖν θέλουσιν... βούλομαι οὖν, cf. also 2 Pet. 
iti. 9 contrasted with 1 Tim. ii. 4. 

τῶν ἐθνῶν. Those who regard the Epistle as addressed to Jewish 
readers explain this as referring to their previous laxity in conforming 
to the customs of their heathen neighbours, but it is more natural 
if addressed to Gentiles, cf. Eph. iv. 17. 

κατειργάσθαι, to have wrought, the word is coupled with ποιεῖν and 
πράσσειν in Rom. vii. 15 and means to put into execution or carry into 
effect. 

πεπορευμένους, the perfect participle denotes walking as you have 
done until recently. The verb is generally used of a literal journey 
but of following a certain line of conduct here and in 2 Pet. ii. 10, 
iii. 3; Jude 11, 16, 18; Lk. i. 6; Acts ix. 31, xiv. 16. 

ἀσελγείαις -- wanton immorality, shameless acts etc., Mk vii. 22; 
Jude 4; 2 Pet. ii. 2, 7; 2 Cor. xii. 21; Gal. v. 19; Eph. iv. 19 and 
in the plural in Rom. xiii. 13 where it is coupled with κώμοις καὶ 
μέθαις. οἰνοφλυγίαις, wine-bibbings, a classical word only found here 
in Biblical Greek though the verb occurs Deut. xxi. 20; Is. lvi. 12. 
It denotes excessive drinking, debauch. κώμοις, revellings, cf. Rom. 
xiii. 13; Gal. v.21. πότοις, carousings, drinking-parties, only here 
in the N.T. In the LXX. it is sometimes used of banquets, Gen. 
xix..3; 2 Sam. iii. 20; Esther vi. 14. ἀθεμίτοις, lit. contrary to law 
and justice. In the only other passage where it occurs in the N.T. 
it is used of intercourse with Gentiles as being unlawful for Jews, 
Acts x. 28. So here those who regard the readers as Jews explain 
it to mean illegal for you to take part in, but more probably it means 
illicit, abominable deeds which are contrary to what is right (fas). 
It occurs in 2 Mace. vi. 5, vii. 1, x. 34. 

εἰδωλολατρίαις. Of idol-worship in 1 Cor. x. 14, but in Col. iii. 5 
it is used as an explanation of covetousness, greed being regarded as 
the idolatry of Mammon, cf. Eph. v. 5, 1 Cor. v. 11. In Gal. v. 20 
it is included among the works of the flesh, but, though coupled 
with sins of drunkenness and immorality, should probably be 
understood literally of tampering with false gods, the word which 
follows being φαρμακεία, sorcery. Here the plural may denote various 
forms of idolatry, or the abominable vices which were so frequently 
connected with idolatry and which would be wrong for Gentiles to 
practise no less than for Jews. 

4. ἐν ᾧ, wherein, in which respect. 

Eevifovrar. In the active the verb is used transitively of enter- 
taining strangers, Acts x. 23, xxviii. 7; Heb. xiii. 2, and once of 
‘‘ surprising doctrines,’’ Acts xvii, 20; ef. Polyb. 3, 114. 4; Joseph. 


4 δ] NOTES 93 


Ant. 1.1.4. In the middle it generally means to lodge, Acts x. 6, 18, 
32, xxi. 16. But here and in verse 12 it is passive and means ‘‘are 
surprised,’’ cf. Polyb. 1. 23. 5, ete. The surprise here attributed to 
their heathen neighbours would be hardly intelligible if the readers 
were Jews, as there is no evidence that the Jews of the Dispersion 
had so generally taken part in heathen excesses that their abandon- 
ment of them would excite astonishment, whereas such new strictness 
on the part of the Gentile converts would provoke criticism. 

συντρεχόντων probably denotes unrestrained indulgence, running 
headlong after, not merely concurrence. 

ἀνάχυσιν, only here in Biblical Greek. Philo uses the word in 
a good sense of the out-pouring of the soul, but here it means the 
excess or flood of riot in which a dissolute life pours itself out. 

ἀσωτίας from a privative and σώζειν, the spendthrift character 
which squanders itself and its goods recklessly. This is the definition 
adopted by Aristotle, Eth. Nic. iv. 1, 4 and it suits the description 
given of the Prodigal Son, Lk. xv. 13 fv ἀσώτως, so also Theophylact 
on Eph. vy. 18, but Clement Al. explains it as meaning the conduct of 
one who is ἄσωτος, i.e. one who cannot be saved, an abandoned 
reprobate. The substantive occurs again in Eph. v, 18, olvos ἐν ᾧ 
ἐστὶν dowrla and Tit. i. 6. ULXX. Prov. xxviii. 7; 2 Mace. vi. 4. 

βλασφημοῦντες, railing at you, reviling you, cf. Matt. xxvii. 39 ff. ; 
. Rom. iii. 8. The word does not necessarily imply blasphemous 
language toward God (as in Mt. ix. 3; Acts xix. 37; Rev. xiii. 6, 
ete.), nor foul accusations against Christians, but might include 
taunts and reproaches against them as being gloomy, morose or 
fanatical. 

5. ot. For this abrupt and emphatic use of the relative, cf. Rom. 
iii. 8, 

δίδοναι or ἀποδίδοναι λόγον is used of rendering account in Mt. 
xii. 36; Lk. xvi. 2; Acts xix. 40; Rom. xiv. 12; Heb. iv. 13, 
xiii. 17. 

τῷ ἑτοίμως κρίνοντι. The T.R. reads ἑτοίμως ἔχοντι κρῖναι for 
which phrase cf. Acts xxi. 13; 2 Cor, xii. 14 and ἐν ἑτοίμῳ ἔχειν, 
2 Cor. x. 6. 

Bengel explains ‘‘ Paratus est Judex; nam evangelio praedicato nil 
nisi finis restat.’’ The living will soon have heard the Gospel, the 
dead have already done so, therefore all is ready for the judgment. 
But the reading of the best MSS. ἑτοίμως κρίνοντι means not so much 
that the judgment is ready to be executed but that God judges readily 
‘*with the unerring precision of perfect knowledge’’ (Chase, Hastings 
D. of B. m1. 795). He knows the opportunities which He has afforded 


94 I PETER [4 5— 


to all and their consequent responsibility in accepting or rejecting His 
message. 

ζῶντας καὶ νεκρούς, the judgment of ‘‘ the quick and the dead”’ is 
referred to again only in St Peter’s speech to Cornelius, Acts x. 42, 
where Christ is the appointed Judge and in 2 Tim. iy. 1, but cf. Rom. 
xiv. 9. Here the personality of the Judge is not stated, but in i. 17, 
ii. 28 God is spoken of as judging. 

6. εἰς τοῦτο γάρ. εἰς τοῦτο does not refer to what precedes, viz. 
that the Gospel was preached to the dead in order that they might 
fairly be included in the judgment. That idea may perhaps be 
suggested by the yap. But wherever εἰς τοῦτο or διὰ τοῦτο in the N.T. 
is followed by ἵνα, ὅπως or an infinitive it points forward to the object 
of the action, e.g. Jn xviii. 37; Acts ix. 21; 2 Cor. ii. 9; Col. iv. 8; 
Eph. vi. 33; 1 Pet. iii. 9; 1 Jn iii. 8. So here the object for which 
good tidings was preached to the dead was that they might live 
unto God in the spirit despite their judgment in the flesh. This 
is the same message which is being taught to the living by their 
sufferings in the flesh. 

καὶ νεκροῖς. Various attempts have been made to explain this 
passage : 

(a) As referring to the spiritually dead in trespasses and sins 
(so Augustine, Cyril, Bede, Erasmus, Luther, etc.). But, having used 
vexpovs in its literal sense of the physically dead in the previous 
sentence, it is hardly credible that St Peter here employs the word 
metaphorically. 

(b) As referring to those who have died since they heard the 
Gospel (so Bengel, who regarded it as impossible that anyone could 
receive the Gospel after death). According to this view the words 
have been explained by Van Soden as a message of encouragement, 
that Christians who received the Gospel but have since been judged 
in the flesh by dying will share in eternal life (cf. 1 Thess. iv. 13—18). 
Hofman, on the other hand, regards it as a warning to blasphemers, 
that those who escape punishment in this life will not be exempted 
from judgment after death. Such interpretations, however, do not 
naturally follow from the words, and if St Peter had meant to 
describe ‘‘ those who have since died,’’ he would have written xexo- 
μημένοις Or τεθνηκόσιν. 

(6) Another interpretation is ‘‘those who hear the Gospel in 
their lifetime but who will be dead before they are judged.’’ 

The most natural interpretation of the words is that good tidings 
was preached to those who were dead at the time when they received 
the message. 


4 6] NOTES 95 


The passage must be considered in connexion with 11]. 19, though 
three important differences must be noticed : 


(a) In iii. 19 one particular generation of the dead is specified, 
viz. those who being disobedient perished in the great typical judgment 
of the ancient world. Here νεκροῖς, though not necessarily universal 
in its scope, is presumably as wide as the preceding ζῶντας καὶ 
νεκρούς. Many of the Fathers, e.g. Ignatius, Hermas, Clement Al., 
Irenaeus, seem to restrict the preaching in Hades to the just alone, 
but in view of the special mention of those who were formerly dis- 
obedient in iii. 19 it would seem as if the proclamation was made to 
all. St Peter is, however, silent as to the results of the preaching. 
In Hades, as on earth, it may have been rejected by many. 

(Ὁ) In iii. 19 the agency of Christ as the herald (ἐκήρυξεν), 
through His spirit quickened and set free by death, is emphasized. 
Here the agent is not specified, but the character of the message is 
defined as being good tidings (εὐηγγελίσθη) and stress is laid upon 
the recipients of the message (καὶ vexpois). The agent and the occasion 
may, however, be identical both in ἐκήρυξεν and εὐηγγελίσθη, though 
early Fathers, e.g. Hermas and Clement Al., ascribed preaching of 
good tidings in Hades to the Apostles. 

(c) In iii. 19 nothing is said about the purpose of the proclama- 
tion, whereas here it is emphasized as being in order that though 
judged in the flesh they might live in the spirit. 


ἵνα κριθῶσι μὲν.. ζῶσι δέ. The μέν clause is practically subordinate 
to the δέ clause, though on the one hand they are judged yet on the 
other they may live. The aorist κριθῶσι denotes the one crisis of 
judgment while the present ζῶσι points to continuous life in the 
spirit. In one sense all who die may be regarded as ‘‘ judged in 
the flesh.’’ Cf. Wisdom iii. 4 

‘*For though they be punished in the sight of men, 
Yet is their hope full of immortality.’’ 

Possibly however, in view of the fact that the disobedient who 
_ perished in the Flood are specially mentioned as being preached to in 
iii. 19, the judgment in the flesh here also refers to those whose death 
was markedly a punishment. σάρξ and πνεῦμα are contrasted in 
ili. 18 and virtually in iii. 21 and iy. 2. 

κατὰ ἀνθρώπους... κατὰ θεόν. κατὰ ἀνθρώπους, cf. 1 Cor. iii. 8 
περιπατεῖτε κατὰ ἄνθρωπον Ξε γα conduct yourselves as men do; 1 Cor. 
ix. 8; Rom. iii. 5; Gal. iii. 15 λέγειν κατὰ dvOpwrov=to speak 
according to human modes of thought, cf. 1 Cor. xv. 32; Gal. i. 11. 

κατὰ θεόν is used in Rom, viii. 27 of the Spirit making intercession 


96 I PETER [4 6— 


for us κατὰ θεόν, Which might mean in the presence of God but more 
probably in accordance with God’s will, cf. 2 Cor. vii. 9,11 (xi.17 κατὰ 
κύριον), Rom. xv. 5 (κατὰ Χριστὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν). In Eph. iv. 24 it means 
after the image of God, cf. 1 Pet. i. 15 κατὰ τὸν καλέσαντα ὑμᾶς, after 
the model of Him that called you. Here the meaning might be in 
the estimation of men...of God but more probably it means judged as it 
is fit that men should be judged but live as God lives. 

7—11. Having urged the necessity of terminating the regime 
of sin, St Peter next gives a summary of what life according to God in 
the Spirit should be. It is a life of sober-mindedness, of watchful 
prayer, of strenuous love, of faithful stewardship in administering 
God’s varied gifts of grace, so that in all things God may be glorified 
in them as members of Christ, to whom be glory and dominion to 
endless ages, Amen. 

7. πάντων δὲ τὸ τέλος ἤγγικεν. The mention of God’s readiness 
to judge both the quick and the dead leads St Peter to remind his 
readers that the end of all things has drawn nearer. Our Lord 
compared the coming of the Son of Man to the Flood, as coming 
unexpectedly upon those who were living in careless, self-indulgent 
ease, eating and drinking, and He warned His disciples to watch 
(γρηγορεῖτε) and not prove wicked servants who eat and drink with 
the drunken. St Luke in a parallel passage represents St Peter as 
asking whether the warning to watch is addressed to all, and in reply 
our Lord shews the special responsibility of ‘‘ the faithful and wise 
steward ’’ (οἰκονόμος) who is appointed to give out food to the Master’s 
household. The persecution of Christ’s followers for His name and 
the preaching of the Gospel among all nations were to be signs of 
His coming and ‘‘ then shall the end come,’’ Mt. xxiv.14, Thus 
there seem to be constant echoes of our Lord’s teaching all through 
this passage of St Peter: (a) The allusion to the Flood (iii. 20 and 
?iv. 6). (Ὁ) The surprise of the Gentiles when Christians refuse to 
join in their drunkenness and immorality may be a comparison with 
the conduct of Noah’s contemporaries. (c) The special responsibility 
of those who are “ stewards (οἰκονόμοι) of the manifold grace of God.’’ 
(d) The persecution of Christians in Christ’s name as a sign that 
the judgment is beginning. (e) Indirectly the fact that his Gentile 
readers are representatives of ‘‘all the nations’’ to whom the Gospel 
was to be preached would be another of the signs predicted by our 
Lord that the ‘‘ end had drawn nearer.’’ 

σωφρονήσατε οὖν, be ye therefore of sound mind. The verb is used 
of the Gadarene demoniac being restored to his right mind, Mk v. 15; 
Lk. viii. 35, and in contrast to being ‘‘ beside oneself’’ in 2 Cor. v. 13. 


4 8] NOTES 97 


In Rom. xii. 3 it is opposed to ὑπερφρονεῖν and in Tit. ii. 6 it is used 
in the sense of being sober-minded. In 4 Macc. i. 31 σωφροσύνη is 
defined as ἐπικράτεια τῶν ἐπιθυμιῶν. So here in view of the approach- 
ing ‘‘end of all things’ Christians are bidden to be sober-minded, 
not carried away by self-indulgence nor by unhealthy excitement. 

νήψατε els προσευχάς, cf. Mk xiv. 38; Lk. xxi. 36. For νήψατε, 
ef. i. 13; all their faculties must be under control and quietly devoted 
to prayer. 

8. τὴν... ἀγάπην ἐκτενῆ ἔχοντες. ἐκτενῇ is the predicate. It 
is assumed that they have love towards one another, but they are 
bidden to maintain it in a fervent, strenuous condition, ef. i. 22. 

ἑαυτούς. For ἀλλήλους as often in N.T. and also class. Greek. 

ἀγάπη καλύπτει πλῆθος ἁμαρτιῶν. The words are borrowed from 
Prov. χ. 12 ‘‘ Hatred stirreth up strife but love covereth all trans- 
gressions.’’ The LXX. however is πάντας δὲ τοὺς μὴ φιλονεικοῦντας 
καλύπτει φιλία but the versions of Aquila and Theodotion read ἐπὶ 
πάσας ἀθεσίας καλύψει ἀγάπη. On the relation of this passage to 
Jas v. 20 see Intr. p. lviii. In Proverbs there can be little doubt that 
the meaning is Love refuses to see faults, it passes over without 
notice and so forgives the sins of others. St Peter’s form of the 
words occurs in Clem. 1 Cor. 49 where Lightfoot explains it, Love 
forgives the sins of others, which he thinks is probably the meaning 
in St Peter. Similarly in St James he explains that the sins of the 
man who is converted are buried from the sight of God, being wiped 
out by the conversion and repentance of the sinner. 

But in 2 Clem. 16 the same words are quoted as follows: ‘‘ Alms- 
giving is good as repentance from sin (is good). Fasting is better 
than prayer but almsgiving (is better) than both. But love covereth 
a multitude of sins and prayer from a good conscience rescues from 
death...for almsgiving removes the load of sin.’> The meaning 
adopted is evidently that love atones for the sins of him who loves, 
the rest of the passage being borrowed from Tobit xii. 9 ‘‘ Alms- 
giving rescues from death and it purgeth all sin.’’ . Cf. Daniel iv. 27 
‘‘redeem thy sins by almsgivings and thine iniquities by acts of 
pity to the poor,’’ Kcclesiasticus iii. 3 ‘‘ He that honoureth his 
father shall atone for sins,’’ Ecclesiasticus iii. 30 ‘‘ almsgiving shall 
atone for sins,’’ Ecclesiasticus iii. 14 ‘‘ pity for a father.,.shall be 
imputed to thee for good against thy sins.’’ Tertullian Scorp. 6 
explains the words as meaning that love wins forgiveness for a man’s 
own sins, so also Origen in Hom. Lev. ii. 4, illustrating them by 
Lk. vii. 47 ‘‘ Her sins which are many are forgiven her for she 
loved much.’’ Clement Al. Paed, iii, 12 quotes the words with the 

I PETER G 


98 | I PETER [4 8— 


formula φησί. Consequently Resch regards them as one of the un- 
written sayings of Christ, but as the preceding passages in Clement 
are quotations from the O.T. this explanation is doubtful, but in 
Didascalia ii, 3 the words are quoted with the formula λέγει Κύριος. 
Clement Al. Strom. ii. 15 explains the words as referring to God’s 
love in Christ which forgives men’s sins, but in Quis div. salv. 38 he 
says that love working in a man enables him to repent and put away 
his own sins. 

For the idea that deeds of-love to others affect a man’s own 
pardon, cf. Lk. xvi. 9; Mt. xxv. 34-40. On the whole the primary 
meaning in St Peter probably is that love forgives the sins of others, 
but our Lord said ‘‘ If ye forgive men their trespasses your heavenly 
Father will forgive you,’ therefore by love which forgives others a 
man does enable God’s forgiveness to be extended to himself, 

9. φιλόξενοι. The duty of hospitality to strangers, commended 
by our Lord, Mt. xxv. 35, is also enjoined in Rom. xii. 13 and Heb. 
xiii. 2. In 1 Tim. iii. 2 and Tit. i. 8 it is demanded as one of the 
special qualifications for an ἐπίσκοπος. In the primitive Church 
Christian travellers would be exposed to certain annoyance and 
possible danger unless the Christians of the place received them 
into their houses, and without such aid the missions of itinerant 
preachers (ἀπόστολοι) would have been almost impossible (cf. Tit. 
iii. 13; 3 In 6—8, 10; Philemon 22; Rom. xvi. 1; 1 Cor. ix. 4—14). 
At the same time such hospitality must have been a somewhat 
serious tax upon Christians who were by no means well off, and from 
the regulations given in the Didache we gather that there was before 
long a real danger that unscrupulous strangers might impose upon 
the generosity of the Church. 

So here St Peter urges his readers to exercise hospitality ungrudg- 
ingly, remembering that any gifts which they possess, whether in 
worldly goods or faculties for service, are only entrusted to them 
as stewards to use them for God. For the duty of giving cheerfully, 
cf. 2 Cor. ix. 7; Rom. xii. 8. In this latter passage, as here, 
charitable duties are coupled with those of preaching, teaching or 
ministering, as varied χαρίσματα given by God to the several members 
of the Body of Christ. 

For γογγυσμός cf. Phil. ii. 14. 

10. καθὼς ἔλαβεν χάρισμα. The aorist most naturally refers 
to their conversion or their baptism but, if worldly goods to be used in 
hospitality are included as a χάρισμα, these would be possessed before 
conversion, and the aorist τσ refer to are endowment - οὗ His 
future stewards. - DOR os εὐ sta 


4 11] NOTES 99 


διακονοῦντες. διακονεῖν, διακονία and διάκονος can be used of any 
kind of ministry or service. Thus our Lord uses it of His own work 
and it is used of the ministry of angels, or of prophets, 1 Pet. i. 12, 
or of apostles, but it is specially used of ministering to the wants 
of others. The word is used both in its general and special sense in 
Acts vi. 1—4 where διακονία is first used of the distribution of alms 
(cf. διακονεῖν rpawéfas) and then of ‘‘the ministry of the word”’ 
i.e. preaching. Again in Rom. xii. 7 διακονία is mentioned as a special 
duty, side by side with prophesying, teaching, exhortation. So here 
διακονοῦντες is first used generally of all kinds of Christian service 
and then specially εἴ ris διακονεῖ. 

There are such numerous echoes of Rom. xii., xiii. in 1 Pet. 
(see Int. p. lx) that there can be little doubt that in this passage 
about the use of various χαρίσματα St Peter is borrowing from 
Rom. xii. 6ff. but instead of employing St Paul’s characteristic 
illustration of the body and its members he uses that of stewardship. 

οἰκονόμοι. οἰκονομία means primarily ‘‘ the office of a steward ”’ 
or ‘*‘ household management,’’ but the latter meaning was used in a 
very wide sense of any kind of provision or arrangement, cf. the 
English word ‘‘dispensation,’’? so in Eph. i. 10, iii. 2, 9; Col. i. 25 
it is used of God’s plan or arrangement; but in 1 Cor. iy. 1, 2, ix. 17 
St Paul speaks of his own stewardship and says that he and his 
fellow-workers should be regarded as ‘‘ stewards,’’ so Tit. i. 7 the 
ἐπίσκοπος must be blameless as being ‘‘ the steward of God”? (cf. the 
Parable of the unjust steward and Lk. xii. 42). In the latter passage 
the steward, though himself a slave, is evidently regarded as being in 
a position of authority over the other servants, but here St Peter 
seems to regard every man as an οἰκονόμος. As members of ‘‘ the 
household of God’’ each one is responsible for using what his 
Master has given him for the benefit of the household in accordance 
with God’s ‘* housekeeping arrangements.’’ 

ποικίλης χάριτος. All the different gifts (χαρίσματα) are bestowed 
by God’s free favour (xdpvs) which shows itself in a variety (ποικίλης) 
of forms (cf. 1 Cor. xii. 4—11; Rom. xii. 3—8). 

11. εἴ tis λαλεῖ. In classical Greek λαλεῖν has generally a 
disparaging sense to chatter but in the N.T. it means to talk, to 
utter one’s thoughts, and is frequently used of God. Where it is 
contrasted with λέγειν it denotes the sound, pronunciation or form 
of what is said while λέγειν refers to the meaning and substance. 
λαλεῖν is frequently used in the N.T. of teachers, of our Lord, the 
apostles and others. So here the context implies that the ‘‘ speaking’”’ 
is a gift of God’s grace which they have to administer as stewards, 


G2 


100 I PETER [4 11— 


and the primary reference is to the utterances of prophets or teachers, 
whether in preaching (προφητεία), exhortation or teaching (cf. Rom. 
xii. 6—8), but other unofficial utterances of Christians may be in- 
cluded, such as their answers to those who demand an account of 
their hope (iii. 15): cf. Mt. x. 20 where the Spirit of their Father is 
promised to speak in the mouth of His persecuted children. 

ὡς λόγια θεοῦ. Bigg takes λόγια as a nominative=speaks as 
Scripture speaks, with sincerity and gravity, but it is better to take 
λόγια AS an accusative. Anyone who undertakes to speak for God 
must do so in meekness and fear. He must remember that his 
message is not his own but God’s. He must not parade his eloquence, 
nor speak lightly and thoughtlessly. 

λόγια occurs again in Acts vii. 38 of Moses receiving ‘living 
oracles,’’ i.e. the Law at Sinai; in Rom. iii. 2 of the Jews being 
entrusted with ‘‘ the oracles of God’’ where it probably means the 
O.T. Scriptures in general. In Heb. v. 12 the Hebrews “ need to be 
taught again the rudiments of the beginning of the oracles of God,’’ 
i.e. elementary Christian truths. In Philo λόγια is certainly used of 
the narrative portions of the O.T., as well as of the Law or the 
utterances of the prophets. So in Christian writers τὰ λόγια τοῦ 
Κυρίου or Κυριακὰ λόγια may sometimes denote the Gospels and not 
merely ‘‘ Sayings of our Lord,’’ e.g. in Polycarp, Papias, Eusebius, 
Ephraem Syrus. 

ὡς ἐξ ἰσχύος. Any services for others, rendered by the Christian 
as a ‘‘minister’’ or servant of Christ, must be performed (a) modestly, 
because they are not due to his own strength, (Ὁ) strenuously, because 
God supplies him with strength. 

χορηγεῖ (see Robinson on Eph. iv. 16). In classical Greek χορηγός 
means the leader of a chorus. Thence χορηγεῖν means (a) to be a 
chorus leader, (Ὁ) to furnish a chorus at one’s own expense, providing 
all necessary requisites to place a play upon the stage, and so (c) in 
late Greek, Polybius, Philo, Josephus and in the LXX. it means to 
supply, provide, or equip. In the N.T. χορηγεῖν only occurs again in 
2 Cor, ix. 10 but the compound ἐπιχορηγεῖν is found in 2 Cor. ix. 10; 
Gal. iii. 5; Col. ii. 19; 2 Pet. i.5, 11, and ἐπιχορηγία in Eph. iv. 16; 
Phil. i. 19. 

ἵνα.. δοξάζηται ὁ θεὸς, cf. ii. 12 and Mt. v. 16 ‘‘that they 
may see your good works and glorify your Father which is in 
heaven.”’ 

διὰ Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ. Just as the prayers of Christ’s members 
are offered to God ‘‘ through Jesus Christ’? as their Head and 
spokesman, so their good works redound to God’s glory through 


412] /NGTHS: >. . Ὁ Ἐς ασὶ 


Him. In Rom. xvi. 27 and Jude 25 glory is offered to God through 
Jesus Christ. 

ᾧ ἐστὶν ἡ δόξα. Grammatically ᾧ might refer to θεός but in 
2 Tim. iv. 18 a similar doxology is addressed to ‘‘ the Lord,’’ 7.e. 
Christ, so also 2 Pet. iii. 18; Rev. i. 6. Therefore here, as also in 
Heb. xiii. 21, the ᾧ may refer to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ which immediately 
precedes it. δόξα occurs in 14 of the 16 doxologies in the N.T. and 
κράτος in 6, while εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων occurs in 8 and εἰς TOUS 
αἰῶνας in 5, ἀμήν being appended to all of them, marking the formula 
as liturgical. The concluding doxology in the Lord’s prayer is not 
found in the best texts either in Mt. or Lk. and is a liturgical 
addition. 

12ff. Having described two of the results of Christ’s sufferings 
in the flesh as being applicable also to His members, viz. (a) the 
termination of sin, (b) a life of service in the spirit, St Peter 
now begins the concluding section of his epistle with the third 
characteristic of suffering, that it is the process by which Christ’s 
members are brought to glory as He was. This thought was 
introduced by the concluding words of the last section. 

Sufferings are not to be regarded with surprise, as though some 12 
strange mischance was interrupting or thwarting God’s loving purpose. 
Rather they are coming to pass in the orderly fulfilment of that 
purpose. They are a refining process (cf. i. 7), a trial by fire intended 
to test the genuineness of Christians. In proportion as they have 13 
a personal share in the sufferings of the Christ they should rejoice, 
as a preliminary to the exultant joy which will be theirs when the 
glory of Christ, as the Head of manhood made perfect in Him, is 
revealed. 

It is a happy thing to be reproached in the name of Christ, as 14 
belonging to Him. Suffering is the distinctive characteristic of 
glory under present conditions. Those who bear the reproach of 
His Name are, as it were, the House of God, the Sanctuary (cf. ii. 5) 
on which the Shekinah and the Spirit of God are resting. But care 15 

.must be taken that it really is Christ’s reproach which they bear. 
To suffer for some crime or for unwarranted interference in the affairs 
of others would only be a disgrace. But to suffer as ‘‘a Christian’’ 16 
is no disgrace. Rather it is a title by which they may glorify God. 

(In announcing the coming judgment upon Israel Ezekiel described 
‘the end as come”? (vii. 2) and the judgment as beginning ‘‘at the 
sanctuary ’’ (ix. 6), cf. Malachi iii., where ‘‘the refining fire purifies 
the sons of Levi first before judgment descends upon sinners.’’) 

So now ‘‘the time is come that judgment should begin with 17 


τοῦ SE ee TP RT ER [4 12— 


the house of God.’’ If its initial stages, as it affects Christians, are 
thus painful, how far more terrible will its final stage be for those 

18 who disobey the good news of God, If the righteous can only be 

_ saved thus hardly, where will the ungodly and sinners appear? 

19 Those, then, who suffer according to the will of God (and not for 
disobedience to that will) should commit their souls (or lives) into 
His keeping as a faithful creator who can be trusted not to deal 
untruly with His own handiwork. This they must do not merely 
by passive submission but by active obedience in doing what is 
good, 

12. ἀγαπητοί seems to introduce a fresh section as in ii. 11. 

πυρώσει (see Intr. p. xli) not ‘ fiery trial’? but ‘ trial by fire,”’ 
referring to the refining of gold by smelting as ini. 7, The phrase 
is probably borrowed from Proy, xxvii. 21 δοκίμιον ἀργυρίῳ καὶ χρυσῷ 
πύρωσις, οἷ, Ps,xvii.3 ‘‘ thou hast tried me’’ (ἐπύρωσας). In the N.T. 
πύρωσις occurs again only in Rev. xviii. 9—18 of the ““ burning’’ 
or conflagration in which ‘‘ Babylon is destroyed.”? 

For fire as a testing, purifying agent cf. Mk ix. 49; Lk. xii. 49; 
1 Cor. iii. 13. Elsewhere fire is the destroying agency of judgment. 
St Peter reverts to the theme of ‘‘ suffering for righteousness’ sake.’’ 
His readers are bidden not to be amazed at it or resent it as some 
strange misfortune which is happening to them by chance (συμβαί- 
vovros). Rather it is coming to pass in the ordered sequence of 
God’s purpose (γινομένῃ) to test and try their character. 

γινομένῃ being without the article might be taken as a predicate, 
‘*do not be surprised that the fiery trial in your midst is taking 
place,’’ but in classical Greek a complex epithet is frequently put 
partly between the article and the substantive and partly outside. 

13. καθὸ Kowwveire=in proportion as you have personal fellowship 
in the sufferings of the Christ. Christians are regarded not merely as 
suffering with (συμπάσχοντες) Christ, (Rom. viii. 17), but as members 
of His body they have a personal share in His sufferings, cf. Phil. 
iii. 10; Col. i. 24; 2 Cor. i. 5. Suffering was the necessary prelude 
to glory in the case of Christ their Head, therefore His members can 
rejoice in present sufferings as being the prelude to glory in which 
they too will share when it is revealed. For rejoicing in suffering 
οὗ, Mt. v. 12; Lk. vi. 23; Acts v. 41; 2 Cor. vi. 10; Phil. ii. 17; 
Col. i. 24, etc. : 

χαίρετε ἵνα might possibly be explained as in Jn viii. 56 ‘‘ Your 
father Abraham ἠγαλλιάσατο wa=rejoiced in the effort to see my 
day.’’ Abraham’s joy was that of anticipation and not that of 
present realization. So the joy of Christians in suffering is prompted 


4 14] NOTES 103 


by their anticipation of their exultation in the glory which is to 
follow. But it is simpler to regard joy in suffering as a preparation 
for the final joy. (See J. H. Moulton, Gram. pp. 205 ff.) 

χαρῆτε ἀγαλλιώμενοι. ἀγαλλιᾶσθαι denotes exultant joy. Here 
such exultation is only regarded as possible when suffering culminates 
in glory, the joy during the process of suffering being of a more 
chastened character. But in i. 6, 8 ἀγαλλιᾶσθαι is used of the 
Christian’s present joy despite his griefs. The two words are com- 
bined in Mt. νυ. 12; Rev. xix. 7. 

14. εἰ ὀνειδίζεσθε ἐν ὀνόματι Χριστοῦ, cf. Ps, Ixxxix. 50—51 
‘‘Remember, O Lord, the reproach of thy servants...wherewith they 
have reproached (ὠνείδισαν) the footsteps of thine anointed”? (τοῦ 
χριστοῦ σου), cf. also Heb, xi. 26 τὸν ὀνειδισμὸν τοῦ χριστοῦ as pre- 
ferred by Moses to all the treasures of Egypt, and Heb. xiii. 13 
‘* bearing His reproach,’’ also Ps. Ixix. 9 ‘‘ the reproaches of them 
that reproached thee are fallen upon me.’’ This verse is an unmis- 
takable echo of the beatitude in Mt. v.11. This is the only passage 
where the actual phrase ὄνομα Χριστοῦ occurs, and it is probably 
employed because it is as χριστιανοί that they are likely to suffer, 
but cf. Mk ix. 41 ἐν ὀνόματι ὅτι Χριστοῦ ἐστε and see note on v. 16. 

τὸ τῆς δόξης Kal τὸ τοῦ θεοῦ πνεῦμα ἐφ᾽ ὑμᾶς ἀναπαύεται. So 
BKL very many cursives, lat. vg. Syr. vg. Clem, Al. Cyr. Al. Tert. 
Fulg., but the lat. vg. and Syr. vg. omit καὶ, 

But NAP many good cursives, Ath. Did. Cyp. (twice) add καὶ 
δυνάμεως after δόξης and have various modifications, e.g. good cursives, 
many versions and Cyprian omit καὶ τὸ and the best cursives Syr. hl. 
and Cyr. have ὄνομα either instead of or combined with πνεῦμα, 

Syr?. reads quia nomen et spiritus gloriae et virtutis (= δυνάμεως) 
dei. Sah.: spiritus gloriae et virtutis dei. Vg. : quoniam quod est 
honoris gloriae et virtutis dei et qui est ejus spiritus, where quod may 
agree with nomen understood, or τὸ τῆς δόξης was taken in the sense 
‘¢ that which appertains to the glory.’’ 

At the end of the verse the T.R. with KLP Vulg. Syr. hl.* Theb. 
. and Cyp. (twice) adds κατὰ μὲν αὐτοὺς βλασφημεῖται κατὰ δὲ ὑμᾶς 
δοξάζεται, and in lat. codd, and Cyp. this is introduced with quod 
evidently agreeing with nomen. This addition (not found in NAB 
some cursives Vulg. some codd, Syr. vg. hl. txt. Memph, Arm. Ephr. 
Tert.) was evidently intended as an explanation of ὀνειδίξεσθε ἐν 
ὀνόματι Xplorov. ὅτι τὸ (ὄνομα) τῆς δόξης ἐφ᾽ ὑμᾶς ἀναπαύεται. Its 
phraseology is borrowed from Rom, ii. 24 (from Is. lii. 5) (ef. Jas 
ii. 7; Rev. xiii. 6, xvi. 9), coupled with v. 16 of this chapter δοξαζέτω 
τὸν θεὸν ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι τούτῳ. 


104 I PETER [414 


It is possible that some of the numerous various readings in this 
passage were liturgical insertions borrowed from early forms of the 
Lord’s Prayer. In-Lk. xi. 2 Ὁ reads ἁγιασθήτω τὸ ὄνομά cov ἐφ᾽ 
ἡμᾶς (d super nos). This addition of ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς Dr Hort (following 
Sanday) suggests may be a trace of a clause sometimes used in the 
Lord’s Prayer, probably when the prayer was used at ‘‘ the laying 
on of hands,”’ ἐλθέτω τὸ πνεῦμά σου (τὸ ἅγιον) ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς (καὶ καθαρισάτω 
ἡμᾶε). This addition is found in Cod. Ev. 604=700 Gregory, and the 
first part of it seems certainly to have been known to Tertullian 
(adv. Marcion. iv. 26-where the argument implies that Marcion used 
this form) and Gregory Nyss. (de Orat. Dom.), also Maximus (vir cent.). 

Dr Chase, however (Texts and Studies, The Lord’s Prayer in the 
Early Church), argues that there were two separate developments of 
petitions in the Lord’s Prayer, (a) a clause asking that the Holy 
Spirit may come upon us, used at the laying on of hands, and thence 
passing into a liturgical form used in eucharistic prayers (e.g. in the 
Didache), (b) at Baptism the clause Hallowed be Thy Name was 
expounded as being the Name τὸ ἐπικληθὲν ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς or ὃ κατεσκήνωσας 
ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις ἡμῶν (see the Eucharistic thanksgiving, Didache x.) 
ef. Jer. vii. 12; Neh. i. 9. 

The preceding liturgical doxology in v. 11 might not unnaturally 
suggest reminiscences of the Lord’s Prayer and account for such 
insertions as καὶ δυνάμεως (lat. virtutis), δόξα καὶ δύναμις being one of 
the earliest forms of doxology added to the Lord’s Prayer (e.g. in the 
Didache), 

The absence of πνεῦμα or its equivalent in some texts and the 
substitution or addition of ὄνομα may suggest that the original 
reading was merely τὸ τῆς δόξης τοῦ θεοῦ or τὸ τῆς δόξης τοῦ θεοῦ 
ὄνομα. If no substantive was expressed ὄνομα would be supplied 
from the preceding verse while πνεῦμα would be a natural insertion 
from Is. xi. 2 ἀναπαύσεται ἐπ᾽ αὐτὸν πνεῦμα Κυρίου, and such an insertion 
might further be facilitated by liturgical forms of the Lord’s Prayer. 
If the original reading was θεογονολλὰ it might easily be altered into 


QEOYTTNEYMA or θεογπνὰ; the letters on being omitted from their 
similarity to the preceding oy. 

τὸ τῆς δόξης. The A.V. and R.V. supply πνεῦμα. There is no 
parallel for the phrase τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς δόξης (but cf. ὁ θεὸς τῆς δόξης, 
Acts vii. 2; τὸν Κύριον τῆς δόξης, 1 Cor. ii. 8). The Holy Spirit is 
however described as τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς ἀληθείας, and as His work is to 
“‘glorify’’ Christ by revealing Him (Jn xvi. 14) He might in that 
sense be described as τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς δόξης. Or τῆς δόξης may be taken 
as a title of Christ. So Mayor on Jas ii. 1 adopts a suggestion of 


ll 


4 14] NOTES 105 


Bengel that τῆς δόξης means that Jesus Christ is the true Shekinah or 
visible manifestation of God, just as He is the Λόγος or Word of God. 
In support of this view Bengel quotes this passage in 1 Pet. and Eph. 
i. 17, ὁ θεὸς τοῦ Κ. ἡμῶν I. X. ὁ πατὴρ τῆς δόξης, and Lk. ii. 32, to which 
Mayor adds Jn i. 14; Heb. i. 3, ete. According to this view τὸ πνεῦμα 
τῆς δόξης would mean ‘‘the Spirit of Christ who is the visible mani- 
festation of God,’’ and the passage might thus be quoted in support of 
the clause in the Creed, ‘‘who proceedeth from the Father and the 
Son.’? But if πνεῦμα governs τῆς δόξης, καί should be translated 
‘‘even,’’ otherwise the second τό would strictly imply that the Spirit 
of God is another Spirit. 

It is therefore better to take τὸ τῆς δόξης as a substantival expres- 
sion meaning ‘‘the mark or characteristic of the glory.’’ For the 
neuter article thus used with a genitive, cf. Mt. xxi. 21, τὸ τῆς σύκης; 
Jas iv. 14, τὸ τῆς αὔριον ; 2 Pet. ii. 22, τὸ τῆς παροιμίας; cf. τὰ τῆς 
σαρκός, Rom. viii. 5; τὰ τῆς εἰρήνης, Rom. xiv. 19. St Peter regards 
suffering as the necessary: mark or characteristic of glory under present 
conditions. As members of Christ Christians will ultimately share in 
the revelation of His glory, i.e. manhood perfected and summed up in 
Christ. Here and now they participate in the preliminary stages of 
that glory by personal fellowship in His sufferings. To be reproached 
in the name of Christ is an indication that the glory is already resting 
upon them. So it was of His approaching sufferings that the Incar- 
nate Christ said ‘‘now is the Son of Man glorified and God is glorified 
in Him”? (Jn xiii. 31), cf. Col..i. 24, 27; 2 Cor. iv. 17; Eph. iii. 13. 

The above idea of suffering as a characteristic of glory would be 
equally intended if St Peter was referring to the Shekinah as the 
glory which was resting upon his readers. St Paul uses ἡ δόξα in 
that sense in Rom. ix. 4 (? cf. Heb. i. 3, ix. 5; 2 Pet. i. 17). It is 
possible also that Jas ii. 1 may mean that Sends Christ is present as 
the true Shekinah among those who are gathered together in His 
name (Mt. xviii. 20), ef. Pirke Aboth, iii. 3: Whenever two men sit 
together and are occupied with the words of the Torah, the Shekinah 
is with them. 

There are also probable allusions to the Shekinah in passages 
- where σκηνὴ and σκηνοῦν are used apparently as a transliteration of 
the Hebrew word J2¥, TDW e.g. In 1. 14, ὁ λόγος ἐσκήνωσεν ἐν ἡμῖν 


καὶ ἐθεασάμεθα τὴν δόξαν αὐτοῦ. Rev. xxi. 3, ἰδοὺ δι σκηνὴ τοῦ θεοῦ μετὰ 
τῶν ἀνθρώπων καὶ σκηνώσει μετ᾽ αὐτῶν. 

So in this passage St Peter goes on to describe the sufferings of 
Christians as a judgment which begins with the House of God, 
apparently meaning the temple and referring to Ezekiel ix. 6 ‘‘ begin 


106 I PETER (4 14— 


at my sanctuary.’’ Similarly in speaking of their sufferings as a 
πύρωσις or ‘‘trial by fire’? he may be alluding to Malachi iii, 1—5 
where the Lord is described as visiting His temple like a refiner’s fire. 
St Peter has already described His readers as being built up as a 
πνευματικὸς οἶκος, ii. 5, and the reference to ‘‘the House of God”’ in 
iv. 17 would be more intelligible if he had just described Christians as 
the resting-place of the Shekinah. This interpretation might give 
some support to the view that ὄνομα should be understood with τὸ τῆς 
δόξης. In the O.T. ‘‘ The Name of God”? (see Westcott, Epp. 8. Jn, 232) 
denotes the manifestation of Himself which God has been pleased to 
give, and ‘‘ the Name”’ and ‘‘ the glory”’ are closely allied. 

Thus 1 Kings viii. 20, Solomon’s Temple is built for ‘‘the Name 
of the Lord,’’ and v. 21, ‘‘the glory of the Lord filled the House.’’ 
So St Peter may mean that in bearing ‘‘the Name of Christ’’ Christ 
as the Shekinah is resting upon them, and the present manifestation 
of ‘‘Christ in them”? is their fellowship in His sufferings. 

It may be of interest to compare Rev. xiii. 6 where the Beast who 
makes war against the Saints is described as ‘‘ blaspheming the Name 
of God and His tabernacle’? (σκηνή), which Andreas explains thus 
σκηνὴ δὲ τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ἡ ἐν σαρκὶ τοῦ λόγου σκήνωσις καὶ ἡ ἐν τοῖς ἁγίοις 
ἀνάπαυσις (cf. vii. 15). 

15. The question whether the ‘‘suffering’’ referred to in this 
passage implies a legal persecution conducted by the state, and its 
consequent bearing upon the date of the Epistle has been fully 
discussed in the Introduction (p. xliiif.). It may therefore suffice here 
to give a brief summary of the conclusions which were there adopted. 

(a) That πάσχειν in other passages of this Epistle, as well as in 
St Paul’s Epistles, is an inclusive word, and can denote any form of 
violence, buffetings, insults, slander, boycotting, without necessarily 
implying organized legal persecution such as torture and execution. 

(b) That legal persecution is perhaps contemplated as a possibility 
from the fact that suffering ὡς Χριστιανός is coupled with at least 
three legal offences (φονεύς, κλέπτης, kaxorotds). But the fourth word 
ἀλλοτριεπίσκοπος, which is separated from the others by the repetition 
of ws, denotes rather an alleged nuisance than a statutable offence and 
the same may therefore be true of Χριστιανός. 

(c) That, even if legal persecution for the name Christian apart 
from other imputed crimes is intended, there is no necessity to 
ae ae a later date than the reign of Nero. 

μὴ γὰρ... πασχέτω. The γάρ means ‘‘Take care that it really is 
Christ’s reproach that you bear ond do not incur suffering by any 
criminal act or social indiscretion.’ 


4 15] NOTES 107 


φονεὺς, κλέπτης, κακοποιός. Some would explain these as refer- 
ring to such false charges as were brought against Christians, cf. the 
note on ii. 12 when κακοποιός is certainly described as a false charge. 
But Christians would have no choice in selecting what false charges 
their accusers should employ, and the merit of suffering unjustly for 
Christ would be the same, whatever the charge might be, provided that 
it was false. Therefore here St Peter must mean ‘‘ Take care that no 
such charge can be brought with truth against you’’ (ef. ii. 20). 
In such a country as Asia Minor in days when violence and dis- 
honesty were rife it might be by no means improbable that some 
imperfectly converted Christians might fall away and be guilty 
of such crimes. Clement of Alexandria tells a story of a favourite 
young convert of St John who became the leader of a band of 
brigands, 

ἀλλοτριεπίσκοπος =‘‘a meddler in other men’s matters’? R.V. 
occurs nowhere else. In the Vulgate it is translated ‘‘alienorum 
appetitor,’’? so Calvin and Beza ‘‘alieni cupidus’’ i.e., one who covets 
other people’s money. In one of the Fayyfim papyri 2nd cent. a.p. 
ἀλλοτρίων ἐπιθυμητής is coupled with ἄδικος. More probably it refers 
to the charge of being busybodies, interfering in the affairs of others. 
In their zeal for purity and truth Christians may not infrequently 
have been indiscreet, and exasperated their neighbours by officious 
attempts to reform their morals or eradicate their heathen supersti- 
tions. So Epictetus speaking of the Cynic Encheir. iii. 22 says, οὐ 
yap τὰ ἀλλότρια πολυπραγμονεῖ ὅταν τὰ ἀνθρώπινα ἐπισκοπῇ ἀλλὰ τὰ 
“ἴδια, cf. Horace, Sat. ii. 3. 19, ‘* Aliena negotia curo excussus pro- 
' priis’’ (see Chase, Hastings D. of B. iii. 783 f.). 

But besides being thus regarded as a social nuisance, as meddle- 
some busybodies, Christians may have been attacked on a more legal 
charge for causing divisions in families (cf. Matt. x. 35, 36) or for 
interfering with trade (cf. Acts xvi. 19 the masters of the divining girl 
at Philippi, and xix. 24—27 the silversmiths at Ephesus—so also Pliny 
describes the trade in fodder and animals for sacrifices as having been 
seriously affected by the spread of Christianity). Such interferences 
with family or commercial life would cause disunion and discord, 

rousing discontent and disobedience, and as such would be an offence 
against the state. This is the explanation adopted by Ramsay who 
insists that an organized persecution conducted by legal methods is 
implied. But though the three preceding words are legal charges 
coupled together with ἢ, ἀλλοτριεπίσκοπος seems to be separated from 
them as a different kind of offence by the repetition of the ὡς. 


1 There is no warrant for the view of Jiilicher that ἀλλοτριεπίσκοπος means 


108 I PETER [4 16— 


16. Χριστιανός. N reads Χρηστιανός here and in the two passages 
of Acts where the word occurs, while B reads Xpewriavés. These 
variations may be merely errors of sound on the part of copyists, but 
Blass argues that Χρηστιανός was the original form of the nickname 
as used by heathen opponents of Christianity. The name ‘‘Chres- 
tiani’’ was certainly so used, and Apologists like Justin Martyr and 
Tertullian argue that it is unfair to punish men for a name which by 
its very derivation (χρηστός) denotes goodness. The termination 
τίανος is Originally Latin, e.g. Caesariani, Pompeiani, but it was 
speedily adopted in Greek both in Palestine and in Asia, 6.9. ᾿Ἡρωδιανοί. 
St Luke says that the name Χριστιανοί was first applied to Christians 
in Antioch, Acts xi. 26. In the Ignatian Epistles it is used as an 
honourable title by Christians of themselves, but originally it was 
evidently a nickname given either by the Roman officials or the 
Gentile mob at Antioch, as the Jewish nickname for Christians was 
‘*Nazarenes’’ (Acts xxiv. 5). It was thus used as a scornful nick- 
name by Agrippa (Acts xxvi. 28) ‘‘ With but little persuasion thou 
wouldest fain make me a Christian’’ (R.V.). So here it describes the 
title which will be used by enemies at whose hands Christ’s followers 
will have to suffer. The letter of Pliny to Trajan (c. 110 a.p.) implies 
that it was a familiar title, which had evidently long been in use in 
his time, and that it had already been the custom to put Christians to 
death for the name only, and the rescript of Trajan merely gives 
imperial sanction to this existing form of procedure. The most 
natural interpretation of Tacitus’ account of the Neronian persecu- 
tion almost certainly implies that Christians were even then punished - 
for the name only. Certainly the Christians themselves, knowing 
their innocence of other charges, would regard ‘themselves as suffer- 
ing under Nero for the name Christian only, even if the magistrates 
who tried the case did not admit this as technically true in legal 
phraseology (but see Intr. pp. xl, xliii f.). 

One fact at. any rate is clearly shewn by Tacitus, viz. that Χριστιανός 
was already a popular nickname in 64 .4.p. Therefore the statement 
of Lipsius that the name Christian did not exist at all until the time 
of Trajan is amply refuted by both secular and Biblical evidence. 

ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι τούτῳ is the reading of the best MSS. but the T.R. 
with KLP and later MSS. reads ἐν τῷ μέρει roUrw=on that account. 
Even if ὀνόματι be read it is possible that it ought to be translated 


*‘delator,” 1.6. a malicious informer, while Bigg’s suggestion, that it means one 
who takes part in trades or practices which do not befit a Christian but are 
ἀλλότρια---ἰ.6. alien and unlawful for him—is most improbable. It is not likely 
that Christians would suffer at the hands of their heathen neighbours merely for 
being inconsistent Christians. 


4 11]. NOTES ae 


‘*account,’’ cf. Mk ix. 41, els ὄνομα ὅτι Χριστοῦ éoré=‘‘on the score 
of your being Christ’s’’ (? Mt. x. 41, εἰς ὄνομα προφήτου, dixalov—). 
Cf. the similar use of nomen in Latin. 

Deissmann Bib. Stud. pp. 146, 196 gives several illustrations of εἰς 
τὸ ὄνομα used of purchases etc. made on behalf of a person or a god, 
i.e. designated as their property (cf. βαπτίζειν εἰς τὸ 6.). So here to be 
reproached ὀνόματι Χριστοῦ may mean ‘‘ because you belong to Christ’”’ 
and ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι robrw=‘‘on that account.’’ But from the constant 
references in the N.T. to the Name of Christ as being ‘‘ called upon’”’ 
Christians (ἐπικληθὲν) (Jas ii. 7), ‘‘carried’”’ (βαστάζειν) Acts ix. 15, 
ες glorified in them’’ 2 Thess. i. 12 etc., ‘‘held fast’’ Rev. ii. 13 ete., 
it is more probable that St Peter includes the more literal sense of 
‘‘Name’”’ and refers to the name Χριστιανός used as a term of abuse 
and ground of accusation, cf. Pliny (Epp. x. 96). Although this passage 
must not be overpressed as implying that Χριστιανός was a definite 
legal charge as yet, it was undoubtedly a recognized ground of com- 
plaint used to injure Christians. In Acts v. 41, 3 Jn 7, (? Jas v. 14) 
τὸ ὄνομα is used absolutely (so Ign. Eph. iii. 1 etc.). 

17. ὅτι [ὁ] καιρὸς τοῦ ἄρξασθαι τὸ κρίμα ἀπὸ τοῦ οἴκου τοῦ θεοῦ. 

The sufferings of Christians are the initial stages in the judgment 
of the world. The process of judgment begins with God’s own house 
first. οἶκος might mean merely household (cf. Heb. xii. 7, where 
chastisement is regarded as a proof of sonship), but it may mean 
God’s temple—and the idea that judgment is to begin at God’s house 
may be borrowed from Ezekiel ix. 6, where God’s agents of punish- 
ment are instructed to ‘‘ begin at my sanctuary’’ (LXX. ἀπὸ τῶν ἁγίων 
μου). Again in Malachi iii. 2, 3, the coming of the Lord is compared to 
a refiner’s fire (cf. πύρωσις in verse 12): He will come to His Temple 
and purify the sons of Levi and purge them as gold and silver that 
they may offer unto the Lord an offering in righteousness...pleasant 
unto the Lord. Then, when the purification of the priesthood is 
accomplished, sudden judgment will descend upon sinners and all who 
do not fear God. So St Peter (ii. 5) has described his readers as a 
spiritual house or temple—a priesthood to offer sacrifices acceptable 
to God, and (iv. 12) their sufferings are regarded as a refining or 
‘trial by fire.’? If the purging of God’s own house is thus painful 
- how far more terrible will be the judgment of sinners which follows 
it. For the idea that the judgment of aliens will be more terrible 
than that of God’s own city cf. Jeremiah’s language about Jerusalem 
xxv. 29, xlix. 121. 


_ 1 An entirely different interpretation of the passage is given by Selwyn (S¢ 
Luke the Prophet, pp. 141 ff.). He connects it with the Book of Henoch (of 


ITO -I PETER [4 17— 


τί τὸ τέλος. τέλος may mean: (a) What shall be the end or fate 
of ? or (b) what shall be the final stage of the judgment? as contrasted 
with its initial stages (ἄρξασθαι---πρῶτον) as seen in the sufferings of 
Christians. 

18. εἰ ὁ δίκαιος μόλις σώζεται x.t.A. The quotation is taken 
from the LXX. of Prov. xi. 31 where the Hebrew is ‘‘ Behold the 
righteous shall be recompensed in the earth; how much more the 
wicked and the sinner.’’ The righteous is regarded as being ‘‘ hardly 
saved’’ because of the painful nature of the ‘‘fiery trial’’ through 
which he has to pass. To share Christ’s glory he has to share 
Christ’s reproach. He has to ‘‘come out of great tribulation,’’ and 
his robes must be ‘‘ washed in the Blood of the Lamb”’’ by personal 
fellowship in his Master’s sufferings, Rev. vii. 14. 

19. ὥστε. The view of suffering inculeated in the preceding 
verses enables Christians to glorify God for permitting them to suffer 
in Christ’s name, and they can do this with perfect trust because 
they can also (καί) feel that they are committing their souls (or lives) 
to the keeping of the God who made them, and He can be relied upon 
not to deal untruly with His own handiwork. τ 

παρατίθεσθαι. In the sense of entrusting a deposit to safe keeping 
cf. our Lord’s dying words Lk. xxiii. 46 quoting Ps. xxxi. 5 εἰς χεῖράς 
gov παρατίθεμαι τὸ πνεῦμά μου, cf. Acts xiv. 23, xx. 32; 1 Tim. i. 18; 
2 Tim. ii. 2. 

κτίστης is used of God in the prayer of Jonathan, 2 Mace. i. 24, 
but does not occur elsewhere in the N.T. 

ἐν ἀγαθοποιίᾳφ. The way in which Christians are to shew their 
trust is by continued well-doing in spite of their sufferings. There 
must be active obedience as well as patient endurance. 


which there are probably traces elsewhere in this Ep.), in which the history of 
the world is divided into ‘‘ Weeks.” In the “‘ Eighth Week”’ the House of the 
Great King (so Selwyn interprets βασίλειον in ii. 9 to mean Royal Palace) will 
be built in glory forevermore. After that in the “‘ Ninth Week” the righteous 
judgment will be revealed to the whole world and all the works of the godless 
will vanish from the whole earth, &c. ; 

So St Peter has described his readers as living stones built into God’s house, 
and here he means, if a man suffer as a Christian, a follower of the Messiah, let 
him not be ashamed, for though pews now unjustly by his fellow-men and 
so *‘ saved with difficulty,’’ he will share the approaching victory of Messiah the 
Great King, whose spiritual house is now being built in glory with us first. The 
Seven Weeks are past and the Eighth is now at its close, and we of this genera- 
tion are ‘‘the house of the Great King.” If the judgment begins with the 
vont | of us, what shall be the end of those who reject the Gospel which we 
preac. i 

This interpretation is very improbable. In this section St Peter is not 
referring to the ‘‘ building up’’ of Christians as a Temple, but to the “trial by 
fire” which they have to undergo. The righteous as God’s Temple are the first 
to undergo iat aes whereas in Henoch during the eighth week sinners are 
delivered in e hands of the righteous. 


5 1] NOTES ΠῚ 


CHAPTER. V 


v. 1—5. Let me then address a special word of exhortation to 1 
those of you who are ‘‘elders’’ in the Church. I do not wish to 
dictate to you as an Apostle, but to plead with you as one of your- 
selves, an ‘‘elder’’ both in office and in age. What I have said 
about suffering as leading to glory is a very real thing to me, for I can 
bear personal testimony to the sufferings of the Christ to which I 
have appealed, and I realize my share in the glory which is one day 
to be revealed. Let me give you the same charge which my Master 2 
gave tome. Shepherd the flock of God which is in your midst, not 
as an irksome duty under a sense of compulsion, but as a labour of 
love; not with any sordid mercenary motives, but with eager 
enthusiasm. Nor, again, must you domineer over the charges 3 
allotted to your care. Rather you should serve as models for the 
flock to imitate. Then when the Chief Shepherd (the unseen partner 4 
in your pastoral work) is manifested to the world you shall receive 
the victor’s crown of glory, composed of flowers that cannot fade. 
Such unassuming conduct on the part of the ‘elders ’’ carries with it 5 
a corresponding claim upon those of you who are juniors to shew due 
submission to them. In fact, all of you, whatever your position may 
be, should gird yourselves with humbleness of mind to serve one 
another (as the Lord Jesus did at the Last Supper). For God opposes 
Himself to the haughty, but gives favour to those who are humble- 
minded. 

1. πρεσβυτέρους οὖν. The οὖν definitely connects the advice to 
Elders with the preceding section. In iv. 17 St Peter probably 
referred to Ezekiel ix. 6, where the judgment ordered to ‘‘ begin at 
the sanctuary ’’ was first executed upon τῶν ἀνδρῶν τῶν πρεσβυτέρων of 
ἦσαν ἔσω ἐν τῷ οἴκῳ. The ‘‘refining’’ (cf. πύρωσις iv. 12) of the 
Sons of Levi as the preliminary to judgment upon sinners in Mal. iii. 
i—5 might further suggest the special responsibility of ‘‘ elders’’ as 
οἰκόνομοι (cf. iv. 10) in the new ‘‘ house of God.”’ 

The word πρεσβύτερος originally suggested the reverence due to 
seniority in age, and still retained much of its original meaning when 
it became a title for a definite office in the Church. The office of 
presbyter was not divorced from the qualifications and associations of 


112 I PETER [5 1— 


age. Thus the πρεσβύτεροι are still put in contrast to νεώτεροι or 
νέοι by Polycarp, ad Phil. v., Clem. ad Cor. i., and in Church 
Ordinances ὁ. 18 presbyters are required to be men of mature age. So 
here St Peter probably uses the word partly in the sense of ‘‘ seniors,”’ 
although he is primarily employing it in its official sense of ‘‘ Elders,’’ 
4.e. Church officers. The title was doubtless borrowed from the 
Jewish synagogue, though the duties of Christian Elders were not 
wholly identical with those of Jewish Elders. We first hear of Elders 
at Jerusalem, Acts xi. 30, receiving the offerings brought from Antioch 
by Paul and Barnabas. In Acts xv. 6, 22, 23 the Elders are coupled 
with the Apostles in the Conference, in choosing delegates and in 
writing .an official letter to other churches. In Acts xxi. 18 the 
Elders, together with James the Lord’s brother, receive St Paul and 
his companions at his last visit to Jerusalem and advise him how to 
conciliate Jewish prejudices. In Acts xiv. 23 Paul and Barnabas 
appoint Elders in every city on their first missionary journey, and in 
Acts xx. 28 St Paul, having summoned the Elders of Ephesus to 
meet him at Miletus, reminds them that they are overseers (ἐπίσκοποι) 
to shepherd (ποιμαίνειν) the Church of God. So here the T.R. inserts 
ἐπισκοποῦντες after royudvare. Elders are also mentioned in Jas v. 
14, where they are to pray for the sick and anoint them with oil. 
But in St Paul’s epistles the title πρεσβύτεροι is not found except in 
the Pastoral Epistles, written at the close of his life, where ἐπίσκοποι 
and πρεσβύτεροι almost certainly refer to the same officers, though 
ἐπίσκοπος may denote one special aspect of their duties. Possibly the 
title πρεσβύτερος did not for some time come into very common use in 
the Gentile Churches to which St Paul wrote, but there is little doubt 
that there were such officers in all churches from the first, and they 
are probably intended by the ἐπίσκοποι to whom a salutation is sent in 
Philippians i. 1 (σὺν ἐπισκόποις καὶ διακόνοιΞ) and by the ‘‘ pastors and 
teachers’’ in Eph. iv. 11, The special duties of the Elders seem to 
have been government and teaching. The absence of the article in 
this verse may denote such as are Elders. 
ὁ συνπρεσβύτερος. Possibly St Peter here avoids calling himself 
ἀπόστολος, though he used that title of himself in the opening 
salutation, because he desires to set an example of humility to the 
Elders. His injunction not to ‘‘lord it over ’’ others would lose much 
of its force if he himself asserted his own apostolic authority. He 
therefore deliberately couples himself with those to whom he appeals. 
Dr Hort, however (The Christian Ecclesia, p. 222), says ‘‘ St Peter 
seems to join with this (the official sense ‘‘ Elder’’) the original or 
etymological sense (i,e. senior in age) when he calls himself a fellow- 


5 2] NOTES 113 


elder, apparently as one who could bear personal testimony to the 
sufferings of Christ.”’ The title Elder is used of himself by St John 
in his second and third epistles. In Papias and Irenaeus it seems to 
be used of those who belonged to the older generation who were 
immediate companions of the Apostles. 

μάρτυς means one who bears witness, and does not in itself mean 
an eyewitness or spectator, the word for which is αὐτόπτης (cf. Lk. i. 
2), but from the stress laid upon personal companionship with Jesus 
as a necessary qualification to be a μάρτυς in Acts i. 22, etc., there is 
little doubt that St Peter here means that he is testifying what he has 
himself seen (cf. Jn xix. 35; Acts xxii. 15). 

St Peter, while coupling himself with the Elders, reminds them 
that his language about suffering and glory is the testimony of one 
who actually witnessed Christ’s sufferings and who is assured of his 
personal share in the glory which is to follow. Harnack (Chronologie, 
p. 452) explains μάρτυς to mean a witness to Christ’s sufferings by 
means of the sufferings which he had himself endured for the Name 
of Christ. 

Kowwvés=partner with Christ, not with you. For the latter 
meaning we should have συγκοινωνός (cf. Mt. xix. 28). 

τῆς μελλούσης ἀποκαλύπτεσθαι δόξης. Cf. Rom. viii. 18. 

2. ποιμάνατε denotes the duty of feeding, protecting and ruling. 
St Peter is apparently handing on to the Elders the same charge which 
our Lord gave to him, Jn xxi. 16; cf. Acts xx. 28. In Eph. iv. 11 
ποιμένες καὶ διδάσκαλοι probably refer to the local officers, i.e. presbyters. 

τὸ ἐν ὑμῖν must be coupled with ποίμνιον and not, as Calvin 
renders it, ‘‘so far as lieth in you” (cf. Rom. xii. 18) =that portion of 
God’s flock which is among you, i.e. in your town or district, not (as 
Bengel and Luther) which depends upon you. 

ἐπισκοποῦντες is read by the T.R. with AKLP etc., m. Vulg. Syrr. 
(add πνευματικῶς Syr. vg.) Memph. Arm. Aeth, R.V!.; but NB, two 
cursives, Hieron. etc. omit the word, so W.H., R.V. margin. 

If the word is accepted it would support the identification of 
πρεσβύτεροι With ἐπίσκοποι in the N.T. In any case St Peter uses 
ἐπίσκοπος Of Christ as the ποιμήν, ii. 25. 

ἀναγκαστώς, under a sense of compulsion, resenting as a burden the 
‘duty imposed upon you, but voluntarily (ἑκουσίως). In another 
sense God’s workers are ‘‘under compulsion’? to work faithfully 
because their stewardship is not due to their own choice only, but is 
imposed upon them by God, ef. 1 Cor. ix. 16,17. Here, however, 
the reference is to the spirit in which they perform their work, ‘‘ not 
grudgingly or of necessity ’’ (2 Cor. ix. 7). : 

I PETER H 


114 I PETER [5 2— 


Some MSS. NAP add κατὰ θεόν, which might mean ‘‘as God 
shepherds His flock,’’ but more probably ‘‘ in accordance with God’s 
will as He would have you do.”’ 

μηδὲ αἰσχροκερδῶς, not in the spirit of a hireling anxious only to 
make some sordid (not necessarily ill-gotten) gain. The phrase may 
imply that it was customary for Elders to receive some stipend, but 
possibly refers to their duties as treasurers of Church funds. In 
Tit. i. 7 one of the qualifications for an ἐπίσκοπος is that he should 
not be αἰσχροκερδής, and so also of deacons, 1 Tim. iii. 8; cf. also Tit. 1. 
11 of false teachers who overturn whole households αἰσχροῦ κέρδους 
χάριν. 

προθύμως, with the ready mind which is not content merely to do 
the minimum of prescribed duty, cf. 2 Cor. viii. 11, 12. 

8. κατακυριεύοντες. The word is used in the LXX. in Jer. iii. 14 
of God as being master or husband of His people, but elsewhere of 
subduing a city, taking possession of a country, or of sin getting the 
mastery over a person. In the N.T. it is used in Acts xix. 16 of the 
demoniac at Ephesus ‘‘mastering’’ the exorcists, and also by our. 
Lord after the ambitious request of James and John, Matt. xx. 25; 
Mk x. 42. He instructs His disciples that true greatness among His 
followers is not to seek for mastery over others as Gentile rulers do, 
but to be minister or servant of all. This saying of our Lord probably 
suggested St Peter’s advice to the Elders in this passage, cf. Matt. 
xxiii, 8—12. 

τῶν κλήρων. In later times κλῆρος and its Latin form clerus came 
to be used in the sense of ‘‘Clergy’’ (κλήρικοι), but there is no 
evidence of this use earlier than Tertullian, and this technical use of 
the word was not derived from the Jewish priesthood, but was a 
gradual development. κλῆρος Ξε (1) the lot by which an office was 
assigned ; (2) the office thus assigned by lot (cf. Acts i. 17, 26), and so 
(3) the body of persons holding the office (Oecwmenius, ad loc. , Suidas). 
Elsewhere in the N.T. it is used of ‘‘ casting lots,’’ or of a ‘‘lot’’ or 
‘*inheritance,’’ Here it must mean the flocks allotted to the care of 
the Elders. In Deut. ix. 29 (see Bigg) κλῆρος is used of the people of 
Israel as being the portion specially belonging to Jehovah—and that 
verse also contains the words τῇ χειρί σου τῇ Kparag—which St Peter 
uses in v. 6. Possibly, therefore, he regards the various communities 
of Christians as parts of God’s estate entrusted to His stewards or 
shepherds. But in this case we should have expected the singular, 
and it is simpler to understand κλήρων as meaning the charges allotted 
to the presbyters, although there is no parallel for this. The Elders 
seem always to have acted as a body, and there is no evidence of a 


5 δ] NOTES 115 


single Elder having the charge of anything corresponding to a special 
‘‘parish.’? The plural here therefore denotes the flocks in all the 
different towns, each of which was assigned to the joint care of the 
Elders of that town. 

τύποι is here used in its ordinary sense of ‘‘ pattern ’’ or ‘‘ model.’’ 
The Elders must lead by example and not drive their flock by 
masterful methods. Cf. 1 Tim. iv. 12; Tit. ii. 7; and in Phil. iii. 
17, 2 Thess. iii. 9 St Paul points his readers to his own ‘‘ example.”’ 

4. φανερωθέντος. The Chief Shepherd is always present among 
His under-shepherds, and at last His presence will be manifested. 
The verb is used of the First Coming of Christ in i. 20 and 1 Tim. iii. 
16, but here it refers to the Second Advent as in Col. iii. 4; 1 Jn ii. 
28, iii. 2. 

ἀρχιποίμενος. The word occurs nowhere else. It refers to 
Christ, who was described as ποιμήν in ii. 25. Our Lord described 
Himself as ‘‘the good Shepherd,’’ Jn x., and in Mt. xxv. 32 
compared His work as Judge to ‘‘a shepherd separating the sheep 
from the goats.’’ In Heb. xiii. 20 He is called ‘‘ the great Shepherd 
of the Sheep.’’ Here St Peter uses the title ‘‘chief shepherd,’’ to 
remind the presbyters that in shepherding God’s flock they are 
working under and with the good Shepherd Himself. 

κομιεῖσθε. Cf. note on i. 9. 

ἀμαράντινον is not quite the same as ἀμάραντον (= τόν σῷ ef. i. 
4), but means made of amaranth, a supposed unfading flower. 
Adjectives in -wos denote the material of which a thing is made, e.g. 
ξύλινος, λίθινος, ὀστράκινος. 

τῆς δόξης is not simply a ‘‘ genitive of quality,’’ but ‘‘ of appo- 
sition’ or ‘‘ epexegetic.’”?’ The crown consists in sharing the glory; 
cl. στέφανον τῆς ζωῆς Jas i. 12; Rev. ii. 10. The phrase στέφανος 
δόξης occurs in Jer. xiii. 18; cf. Ps. viii. 6 δόξῃ καὶ τιμῇ ἐστεφάνωσας 
αὐτόν. 

στέφανος might possibly mean a festal garland, but more probably 
the victor’s crown, which is its regular meaning in the N.T. as 
contrasted with διάδημα, the royal crown. But στέφανος is used of 
the crown of thorns, which was certainly intended as an emblem of 
royalty, and in the Apocalypse also it may denote a royal crown, as 
-it does sometimes in the LXX. 

δ. ὁμοίως; cf. iii. 1. Such unassuming conduct on the part of 
the presbyters demands a corresponding or reciprocal duty of sub- 
mission on the part of those who are under their authority. 

νεώτεροι. Ye younger probably refers to age and not to office, as 
also in 1 Tim. y.1; Tit. ii. 6, in which case πρεσβυτέροις also in this 


Η 2 


116 I PETER [5 5— 


‘verse means older men in general, and not official ‘‘ elders’’ as in 
v. 1. At the same time such ‘‘elders’’ would generally, though 
not always, be seniors in age. Polycarp, v. 6, however, borrowing 
from St Peter, mentions νεώτεροι between his instructions to διάκονοι 
and πρεσβύτεροι, and says that it is right to submit to the ‘elders ”’ 
and deacons as to God and Christ. Therefore he probably inter- 
preted πρεσβυτέροις here in an official sense, but the warnings which 
he gives to νεώτεροι are against impurity and lust, and are therefore 
suited to younger men rather than to minor officials of the Church. 
Others, however, explain νεώτεροι to mean subordinate officers of some 
kind who performed the menial duties. In support of this they refer 
to Acts v. 6, where the νεώτεροι carried out Ananias for burial. But 
in y. 10 those who buried Sapphira are called νεανίσκοι, evidently 
referring to the same persons. Therefore in both verses it probably 
means merely ‘‘ young men,’’ cf. Lk. xxii. 26. 

πάντες sums up the duties of all alike, whether presbyters or their 
flock, whether seniors or juniors. 

ἀλλήλοις. The dative denotes the persons whose interests are 
affected (dativus commodi et incommodi), and is used loosely with 
various verbs ; so here gird yourselves to serve one another or in your 
dealings with one another. There is no need to supply ὑποτασσόμενοι 
as the"l.R. does. - 

ἐγκομβώσασθε (see Suicer, Bigg, ad loc.). κόμβος, according to the 
glossaries, means a knot, a button in later Greek (Kennedy, Sources), 
and so éyxéuBwua May mean a garment tied on over others. Suidas 
uses κόμβος of a knot by which a pair of sleeves were fastened behind 
the neck, possibly to leave the arms free for action, while Pollux 
describes it as a little white garment which slaves wore over their 
tunic. Hesychius in one passage uses the substantive of a kind of 
blacksmith’s apron, but elsewhere he explains the verb as meaning to 
put on a robe or to wrap oneself. Longus, Pastoraliwm, describes a 
shepherd casting off his ἐγκόμβωμα in order to run fast. In this case 
the meaning here may be merely that humility is the proper robe for 
a Christian (cf. iii. 3,4). But, if the word was specially used of a 
slave’s dress or apron, it is better to translate as the R.V. “σίγα 
yourselves with humility,’’ in which case there is doubtless a reference 
to our Lord girding Himself with a towel at the Last Supper as an 
example of humility and service (Jn xiii. 4). 

ταπεινοφροσύνην, lowliness of mind, in classical Greek would 
denote a mean-spirited or grovelling attitude of mind. It is only 
in Christian phraseology that humility is recognized as a virtue. 
The humility of Christians towards one another must not be merely 


5 6] NOTES 117 


superficial and limited to outward demeanour, but must be prompted 
by an inward attitude of mind. Cf. Col. iii. 12 ἐνδύσασθε... ταπεινο- 
φροσύνην. 

[6] θεὸς ὑπερηφάνοις ἀντιτάσσεται κιτιλ. From Prov. iii. 34, 
occurs also in Jas iv. 6 with the same variation from the LXX., viz. 

ὁ θεός for Κύριος. (See Introduction, p. lviii f.) 

ὑπερηφάνοις from ὑπὲρ and φαίνομαι, those who are conspicuous 
above others, so in a bad sense, haughty. The word is frequently 
used in the LXX. and Lk. i. 51; Rom. i. 30; 2 Tim. iii. 2. 

δίδωσιν χάριν. In the LXX. δίδοναι χάριν means to give a person 
favour or acceptability in the eyes of another (Gen. xxxix. 21; Ex. 
xii. 36). So in Prov. iii. 34 the meaning is that God gives the lowly 
acceptance before true men as well as before Himself, and this may 
be the meaning in St James, viz. that God gives a far truer accept- 
ance than can be won by courting the friendship of the world, but Parry 
explains, ‘‘ bestows a greater favour,’’ i.e. the gift of regeneration. 
Here the thought of acceptance with man, which God grants to the 
humble, is subordinated to the higher acceptance with God. It is 
only the humble who ‘‘find favour’’ with God. 

6—14. The way therefore to attain true greatness, to be sialon 6 
in God’s good time, is to humble yourselves under the mighty hand of 
God, submitting patiently to whatever trials He sends you; casting 7 
all the burden of your anxiety upon Him in full assurance of His 
loving care for you. 

But this does not justify any neglect of precaution on your 8 
part. You must have all your faculties under perfect control and be 
on the watch, for you have an active opponent to deal with. The 
devil, like a roaring lion, is ever prowling round you, hunting for 
some prey to devour. (Do not let the fear of suffering terrify you 
into submission.) Stand your ground against him with the solid 9 
front which faith can give. Remember that you do not stand alone. 
You are part of a band of brothers, stationed like yourselves in the 
world. Your experience is not peculiar. The same discipline of 
suffering is being carried out by God’s will in their case also. But 10 
however painful your experience may be, remember that it is sent by 
God whose every thought is loving favour. His final purpose for you, 
to which He called you, is to share His own eternal glory as members 
of Christ (your glorified Head). After passing through a short period 
of suffering He Himself will equip you fully, He will stablish you, He 
will give you the needful strength for the fight. To Him be the 11 
might of victory to all eternity. Amen. Silvanus, the bearer of this 12 
short letter, is one whom I regard as a faithful brother to you. My 


118 I PETER [5 6— 


object in writing to you is to encourage you and to give my testimony 
to the fact that your position as Christians and the sufferings which 
it involves are in very truth a sign of God’sloving favour. Stand fast 
then to maintain it. 

1. The sister Church in Rome, the new Babylonish exile of the new 
Israel of God, which shares with you God’s call to be His chosen 
people, sends you her greeting, as also does Mark, my son in the 
faith. 

14 Greet one another with a kiss of love. May God give the blessing 
of peace to all of you as members of Christ. 

6. ταπεινώθητε οὖν. Such humility towards fellow-Christians 
is only the outward expression of humility towards God, just as 
obedience to rulers, masters or husbands was shewn to be based 
upon fear and subjection towards God. In their present circum- 
stances of “" trial by fire’’ such humility towards God must be shewn 
by patient, trustful acceptance of suffering as part of His loving 
purpose. They must not resent it as ‘‘a strange chance’’ or be 
fretful with anxiety (μέριμνα). Suffering for Christ is in itself a 
position of favour (cf. Phil. i. 29). To bear it humbly is the con- 
dition for being exalted to full and final favour. 

κραταιὰν χεῖρα τοῦ θεοῦ. The ‘mighty hand’”’ of God is generally 
used in the LXX. of God’s power in deliverance, e.g. from Egypt, 
Ex. iii. 19; Deut. ix. 29, etc., but in Ezek. xx. 34 it is used of God’s 
power in judgment, in scattering His people in exile. So here God’s 
‘mighty hand”’ is shewn in judgment, but that same ‘‘ mighty hand ”’ 
will exalt those who humbly submit to His discipline. 

ὑψώσῃ, for the exaltation of the lowly cf. Matt. xxiii. 12; Lk. i. 52, 
xiv. 11, xviii. 14. 

ἐν καιρῷ: AP and some cursives and versions add ἐπισκοπῆς 
from ii. 12. Here it means in His own good time. Christians must 
not be impatient if God seems ‘‘ to tarry long with them.’ 

7. ἐπιρίψαντες. The words are borrowed from Ps. lv. 22 ἐπίριψον 
ἐπὶ Κύριον τὴν μέριμνάν σου καὶ αὐτός σε διαθρέψει. In times of danger 
the Christian is to cast all the burden of his anxiety or alarm (μέριμνα) 
upon God with confident trust in His loving care (μέλει). The A.V. 
casting all your care upon Him for He careth for you misses the 
distinction between the two words. 

8. νήψατε, γρηγορήσατε. Such absence of anxiety, such self- 
abandonment to God’s care does not warrant any slackness or want 
of watchfulness, cf. 1 Thess. v. 6. Here νήψατε is more metaphorical, 
οἵ, i. 13, iv. 7. For γρηγορεῖν as a precaution against temptation 
οἱ, Matt. xxvi. 41, 


5 8] NOTES 119 


ὁ ἀντίδικος. The word denotes literally an opponent in a court of 
law, as in Matt. v. 25; Lk. xii. 58, xviii. 3, Here Blass (Grammar 
N.T. Gk. p. 163) regards it as virtually an adjective agreeing 
with διάβολος, as the latter word would otherwise require the article, 
unless it is to be taken as a proper name. 

διάβολος is used thirteen times in Job to represent the Hebrew 
Satan, as also in Zech. iii. 1 where Satan is seen in vision standing 
at the right hand of Joshua the High Priest as his accuser, cf. 
Ps. cix. 6 ‘‘ Let Satan (=an accuser) stand at his right παπᾶ." In 
1 Chron. xxi. 1 Satan stands up against Israel rather as a tempter 
than an accuser. In the N.T. both διάβολος and Σατανᾶς are used 
and the two titles are combined in Rev. xii. 9, xx. 2. διάβολος 
suggests malicious accusation, Satan spitefully accuses men to God, 
οἵ. Job i. 9 ‘‘doth Job fear God for nought?’’ and Rey. xii. 10 
**the accuser (κατήγωρ) of our brethren.’’ He also accuses God to 
men, making them doubt or distrust His love or power, and similarly 
he accuses men to each other. 

λέων ὠρυόμενος, a roaring lion, cf. Ps. xxii. 13 (ὡς λέων 6 ἁρπάζων 
kal @pudpevos). 

περιπατεῖ, cf. Satan’s description of himself in Job i. 7 I come 
‘** from going to and fro in the earth and walking up and down in it”’ 
(ἐμπεριπατήσα:). 

ζητῶν καταπιεῖν, secking to devour (B).. A adds riva=whom he 
may devour, while NKLP have rwwd=someone to devour. 

The particular form of temptation to which St Peter refers is 
that of denying the faith through fear of suffering or persecution. 
This is seen from the words which follow τὰ αὐτὰ τῶν παθημάτων. 
So in the letter written by the Churches of Lyons and Vienne during 
the persecution of Marcus Aurelius those who at first denied the 
faith and afterwards repented and stood firm are described as being 
**devoured’’ by the beast and afterwards disgorged alive by him. 
It was this very temptation to which St Peter himself had yielded 
when he denied his Master in the hour of danger, when ‘“ Satan 
desired to have the disciples to sift them as wheat.’’ He is now 
fulfilling Christ’s command ‘‘ Do thou, when once thou hast turned 
again, stablish thy brethren’? (Lk. xxii. 32). 

Ramsay, who insists that official organized persecution is referred 
to, explains περιπατεῖ fnrév as describing the searching out of 
Christians which was prohibited by the rescript of Trajan, and 
therefore he shews that the Epistle is certainly earlier than 112 a.p. 
But, while we accept the early date, there is no necessity to interpret 
this metaphorical description of. Satan prowling about like a lion in 


120 I PETER ee 


search of prey as being literally fulfilled by the human persecutors 
who acted as Satan’s agents. | 

In other passages in this Epistle the sufferings of Christians are 
described as being in accordance with God’s will. The fact that they 
are here connected with Satan is not contradictory to that view. In 
Job’s case Satan was permitted by God to employ suffering to try 
his faith, and St Paul’s ‘‘ thorn in the flesh’’ is described as ‘‘ the 
messenger of Satan’’ though given to him by God to humble him. 
So here the sufferings of Christians, though permitted by God’s 
loving purpose as a smelting fire of purification, are at the same 
time instigated by Satan and are made use of by him to overwhelm 
his victims if possible by making them deny the faith. 

9. ᾧ ἀντίστητε, whom withstand, cf. Jas iv. 7 and Eph. vi. 
11, 18, 

στερεοί. The adjective means firm, solid, compact, so in Heb. v. 
12, 14 it is used of ‘‘ solid food’’ and in 2 Tim. ii. 19 of a ‘firm 
foundation.’’ The verb is used in Acts xvi. 5 of the churches being 
‘consolidated in the faith,’’ and in Col. ii. 5 St Paul rejoices to see 
τὴν τάξιν Kal τὸ στερέωμα THs els Χριστὸν πίστεως on the part of his 
readers, where Lightfoot explains στερέωμα in a military sense ‘‘ solid 
front’’ or ‘‘ close phalanx’’ and compares 1 Mace. ix. 14. So here 
St Peter urges his readers to face the foe with a solid front, shoulder 
to shoulder not merely with their fellow-Christians in Asia Minor 
but as part of one great brotherhood who are all engaged in the 
same conflict in the world. 

τῇ πίστει may mean your faith as the R.V. or the faith R.V. 
marg. In the former case the meaning would be do not allow the 
bulwark of your faith and trust in God to be broken through, or 
standing firm in virtue of your faith. In the latter case the meaning 
is standing firm for the Faith, the cause of Christ. So Phil. i. 27 
συναθλοῦντες τῇ πίστει τοῦ evaryyedlov=joining in the contest in which 
the Faith of the Gospel is engaged, cf. 1 Tim. iv. 1 ἀποστήσονταί τινες 
τῆς πίστεως =some will desert from the Faith; 2 Tim. iv. 7 τὸν καλὸν 
ἀγῶνα ἠγώνισμαι...τὴν πίστιν τετήρηκα, cf. 1 Cor. xiii. 6; 2 Tim. i. 8; 
3 Jn 8. 

εἰδότες. The thought that they are not alone, that their sufferings 
are not exceptional but are shared by the whole Christian brotherhood, 
is, on the one hand, a message of encouragement reminding them that, 
despite the insignificance of each detachment, they are part of one 
glorious army. On the other hand, it is a reminder of their responsi- 
bility not to weaken the cause of others by any cowardly surrender 
in their part of the field of battle. 


5 10] NOTES 121 


τὰ αὐτὰ τῶν παθημάτων is an unusual and irregular construction, 
τὰ αὐτὰ being practically treated as a substantive, the same kinds of 
sufferings, the same ‘‘ trial by fire.’’ 

ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ might possibly mean in other parts of the world as 
contrasted with Asia Minor, but probably it means in the same worldly 
surroundings as yourselves, cf. Jn xvi. 33, xvii. 11. The world is the 
battle-ground of the Church Militant. 

ἐπιτελεῖσθαι, are being accomplished. In their case, as in your own, 
their sufferings are no chance but the working out to its completion 
of God’s loving purpose. 

Usually εἰδέναι followed by an infinitive means to know how to do 
something (Lk. xii. 56; Phil. iv. 12) and ὅτι or a participle is used of 
knowing that something is the case, but the accusative and infinitive 
are used in that sense in Lk. iv. 41 and so here. 

Another rendering suggested (Hofman, see Bigg’s note) is knowing 
how to pay the same tax of suffering as your brethren in the world 
(cf. Xen. Mem. iv. 8, 8) but this meaning is improbable, as elsewhere 
(30 times in LXX., 10 in N.T.) ἐπιτελεῖν Ξε ῦο finish or accomplish. 
E. F. Brown (Journ. Theol. Stud. vu. 450) quotes Lightfoot on 
Gal. iii. 3 for taking ἐπιτελεῖσθε in that passage as a middle voice, 
possibly in a sacrificial sense (cf. Hdt. τι. 63, 1v. 186). So here he 
renders knowing how to bring to (sacrificial) perfection, for (the benefit 
of ) your (whole) brotherhood which is in the world, the same things in 
the way of sufferings (as they bear). For a share in Christ’s sufferings 
regarded as a contribution on behalf of the church ef. Col. i, 24. 

10. πάσης χάριτος. The God of all grace or of every grace. 
St Peter’s readers might be tempted to doubt God’s favour towards 
them because of their sufferings. He therefore assures them that the 
same loving favour, which called the Gentiles (cf. i. 10 τῆς εἰς ὑμᾶς 
χάριτος), is being exercised even in their sufferings, because they are 
to culminate in eternal glory, and in the meanwhile God’s favour 
will be shewn in equipping His followers with all needful strength. 

εἰς τὴν αἰώνιον αὐτοῦ δόξαν probably points forward to the con- 
summation of the glory as it will be finally revealed. But just as 
Christians share in eternal life here and now, so also they share in 
eternal glory. ‘They have been called ‘‘ out of darkness into God’s 
marvellous light’’ (ii. 9), and even in their sufferings something of 
the glory already rests upon them, iv. 14. 

ἐν Χριστῷ is probably used, as in the final salutation, of the 
incorporation of Christians in Christ. It is as ‘‘ members of Christ ’’ 
that they are called to share God’s glory. The expression ‘‘in Christ’? 
is intensely Pauline but we have no warrant for supposing that the 
idea was peculiar to St Paul. It underlies much of St John’s language 


H5 


122 I PETER [5 10— 


in his Epistles and sums up numerous sayings of our Lord recorded 
in the fourth Gospel. 

ὀλίγον παθόντας, for ὀλίγον cf. i. 6. Here it probably means for a 
little while as contrasted with eternal glory, but the brevity of the 
Christian’s sufferings is only one aspect of their slightness. 

Westcott and Hort join ὀλίγον παθόντας with the verbs which 
follow, that God will perfect, stablish and strengthen them after they 
have suffered a little while. But stablishing and strengthening at 
any rate would be more necessary during the time of suffering rather 
than after it. Therefore, if the words are to be thus connected, the 
aorist participle might be explained as summing up as one idea the 
whole period of suffering during which God’s help will be given. 
The A.V. and ΠΥ. place a comma both before and after the words 
‘‘after ye have suffered for a little while’’ leaving it uncertain 
whether they are to be joined with the preceding clause or with the 
verbs which follow. It seems better however to take ὀλίγον παθόντας 
with καλέσας, that God has called them to eternal glory after a brief 
discipline of suffering, because (a) this gives the most natural meaning 
to the aorist participle, viz. after you have suffered, (b) it is some- 
what characteristic of St Peter’s style to put an emphatic participle 
at the end of a clause, 6.9. πάσχων ἀδίκως, ii. 19; βλασφημοῦντες, 
iv. 4, 

αὐτὸς, shall Himself, etc. Besides the mutual support which 
members of the brotherhood may give to one another they have the 
assurance of God’s own support. 

καταρτίσει either restore R.V. marg. or perfect R.V. The verb 
is used in Matt. iv. 21; Mk i. 19 of the disciples mending their 
nets; in Gal. vi. 1 of restoring one who has been overtaken by a 
fault; in 1 Thess. iii. 10 of making good deficiencies. Again in 
1 Cor. i. 10; 2 Cor. xiii. 11 it may refer to the restoration needed 
by the Corinthian Church in consequence of their party factions, etc. 
So here it may mean that the Christian when bruised and battered 
by persecution will be refitted and restored by God’s grace. 

Elsewhere however the word means to fit out or equip perfectly ; 
so Lk. vi. 40 ‘‘ everyone when he is perfected shall be as his Master ’’ ; 
and this may be the meaning here, that God will not leave His 
followers insufficiently equipped for the fray. 

στηρίξει, shall stablish you. The word is used of fixing a thing 
firmly, making it stable. St Peter when warned of his fall was 
bidden ‘‘ when once thou hast turned again stablish thy brethren ”’ 
(Lk. xxii. 32). St Paul uses it frequently of God, Rom. xvi. 25; 
2 Thess. ii. 17, iii. 3, while it is used of men in 1 Thess. iii. 2; 
Jas v. 8; Rev. iii. 2. 


5 12] NOTES 123 


σθενώσει, shall strengthen you, The verb occurs nowhere else in 
the Greek Bible and σθένος is only found three times in the LXX. 
and never in the N.T., though ἀσθενής, ἀσθένεια and ἀσθενεῖν are 
frequently used of bodily or moral weakness. 

[θεμελιώσει], shall settle you, give you a firm foundation, is 
added by nearly all MSS. except AB Vulg. Aeth. and is retained 
in the R.V. marg. 

In all the above verbs the T.R., following Sates of the later 
MSS., instead of the future indicative, reads the 3rd person 1st aorist 
optative καταρτίσαι x.r.X. =may he perfect (or restore) you, etc. 

11. αὐτῷ here refers to God whereas in iv. 11 the doxology 
was probably addressed to Christ. 

Probably ἐστίν not ἔστω should be understood, as ἐστίν is found 
in iv. 11 but no verb is expressed in any of the other doxologies 
in the N.T. and some of them are apparently precatory. So here 
the R.V. renders ‘‘ to Him be the dominion,’’ ete. The T.R. inserts 
ἡ δόξα καὶ from iv. 11. 

κράτος is only used of God in the N.T. It occurs only in one of 
St Paul’s doxologies, 1 Tim. vi. 16, but is found in Jude 25; Rev. 
i. 6, v. 13. 

12. Sid Σιλουανοῦ. διά may refer (a) to the scribe by whom 
the Epistle was written or (b) to the messenger by whom it was 
conveyed. In favour of (a) it may be urged that St Paul certainly 
employed amanuenses to write his Epistles and that there is strong 
probability that St Peter did the same. As a Galilean fisherman, 
it is argued, he could only have a very imperfect knowledge of 
Greek and, according to tradition, required the services of Mark as 
his ‘‘ interpreter,’’ so that he could hardly have composed such an 
Epistle himself. 

Zahn therefore, following out the suggestion of earlier German 
writers, maintains that St Peter entrusted the composition of the 
letter to Silvanus, adding only the last few verses himself, as St Paul 
usually did. Selwyn, with an ingenuity which is hardly likely to 
find many supporters, identifies Silvanus with St Luke and argues 
that he not only wrote this Epistle for St Peter but had also 
acted as St Paul’s amanuensis in his Epistles to the Romans and 
Ephesians, thus accounting for the coincidences between 1 Pet. and 
- those Epistles. Against (a) it may be urged 

(1) that if so important a person as Silas wrote the Epistle but was 
not the bearer of it we should have expected him to send a salutation 
himself, as he would certainly be known to some of the readers, 
having worked in Galatia with St Paul on his second journey, 

(2) that the Epistle does not read like a joint production in which 


124 I PETER [5 12 


St Peter furnished the ideas while another was responsible for the 
language. 

Therefore it is more probable that Silvanus was the messenger by 
whom the letter was sent. διά is certainly used in that sense in 
Acts xv. 23 and it is almost certainly used of the messengers in 
some of Ignatius’ Epistles. The commendation of Silvanus would 
have special force if he was starting on a missionary journey through 
Asia Minor and St Peter availed himself of the opportunity to send 
this letter to the churches which Silvanus proposed to visit. 

Silvanus is generally assumed to be the Silvanus who is mentioned 
by St Paul in 1 Thess. i. 1; 2 Thess. i. 1; 2 Cor. i. 19, from which 
passages we gather that he was St Paul’s companion and fellow- 
worker in Corinth during his second missionary journey. This in turn 
makes it practically certain that Silvanus is to be identified with 
Silas who was St Paul’s chief companion at the same time and place 
according to Acts. In this case we know that Silas was one of ‘‘ the 
‘leaders among the brethren,’’ presumably in Jerusalem, who was 
chosen together with Judas, called Barsabbas, to convey to the Church 
in Antioch the decisions of the Apostolic Conference, Acts xv. 22. 
He was therefore presumably a Jewish Christian (cf. Acts xvi. 20 
‘*these men, viz. Paul and Silas, being Jews’’) but was prepared to 
adopt a liberal policy towards Gentiles. In Antioch he worked for 
some time as a ‘‘ prophet’’ or preacher and was chosen by St Paul to 
accompany him on his second missionary journey. Such a colleague, 
representing as he did the mother Church of Jerusalem, would be 
very valuable in helping to unite the Jewish and Gentile Christians 
in Asia Minor. With the same object St Paul delivered the decrees 
of the Apostolic Conference to the Asiatic Churches. Thence St Paul 
and Silas crossed to Macedonia, being debarred from preaching in 
Asia or Bithynia as they proposed to do. At Philippi they were 
imprisoned together and, as St Paul uses the plural ‘they have 
beaten ws...being Romans,’’ it would seem that Silas was also a 
Roman citizen. This may possibly account for the Roman form 
of his name}. 

From Philippi Silas accompanied St Paul to Beroea and remained 
there with Timothy fora time, when St Paul left for Athens instructing 


1 It is generally held that Silas is merely a contraction for Silvanus (cf- 
Λουκᾶς for Λουκανὸς, Tapyevas for Παρμενίδης), the termination -as being used 
as an abbreviation for all kinds of longer name-endings. Others however con- 
sider that Silas was his original Hebrew name and that Silvanus is merely a 
latinized form of it. So Jerome derived Silas from Sh’liach=one sent=aréoro- 
dos. If however Silas was his original name we might have expected it to be 
lengthened into Silanus, which was a well-known Latin name, rather than 
Silvanus, the name of a somewhat objectionable pagan God. 


5 12] NOLES 125 


them to join him there as soon as possible. From Athens they 
were again apparently sent back to Macedonia to report progress — 
there (see 1 Thess. iii. 1) and again joined St Paul in Corinth (Acts 
xviii. 5). After this we hear nothing more of Silas except in this 
verse, where we find him with St Peter and St Mark apparently in 
Rome. As he is not mentioned in the Epistle to the Romans it is 
practically certain that he had not yet visited Rome in 57 (?). Again 
he cannot have been in Rome during St Paul’s first imprisonment, 
otherwise he must surely have been mentioned among the fellow- 
workers of the circumcision who were a comfort to St Paul. Nor 
again was he in Rome during St Paul’s second imprisonment when 
he wrote 2 Tim. in which he says ‘‘ Only Luke is with me.’’ The 
visit of Silvanus to Rome must therefore apparently be placed either 
just after St Paul’s release about 61 or 62 or after St Paul’s death. 
There is therefore an interval of at least eight or ten years during 
which we know nothing of Silas. It is hardly likely however that 
one who had been such an ardent missionary with St Paul should 
have abandoned the work altogether. Therefore it is quite possible 
that he may have revisited the scenes of his former labours in Asia 
Minor and carried out the original design of preaching in Bithynia, 
possibly extending the work into Pontus and Cappadocia also. 

The emphatic position of ὑμῖν suggests that it should be taken with 
τοῦ πιστοῦ ἀδελφοῦ rather than with ἔγραψα from which it is widely 
separated in the sentence. In this case St Peter may well be referring 
to the past work of Silvanus among the Asiatic Christians. We have 
no evidence as to the reason of his visit to Rome. He may have 
come there as a Roman citizen in the interval between two missionary 
journeys. He may have come to visit his old colleague St Paul, 
or possibly at St Paul’s request he may have come with St Peter 
to aid in uniting the Jewish and Gentile Christians. For such a 
task his past experience in Jerusalem, Antioch and in the mission 
field would give him special qualifications. 

πιστοῦ ἀδελφοῦ, cf. the commendation of Tychicus, the bearer 
of Col. and Eph., Eph. vi. 21; Col. iv. 7. ὡς λογίζομαι, not as 
in the A.V. as I suppose, as though St Peter had any doubt about 
his faithfulness, but as in the R.V. as I reckon. In view of the 
fact that Silas had been St Paul’s companion and that Judaizers 
- in Asia tried to represent that St Peter and St Paul were opposed 
to one another, such a commendation of Silvanus from St Peter 
would be an indication that he still ‘‘ gave the right hand of fellow- 
ship to St Paul’s work.’’ If, as Dr Chase suggests, Silvanus was 
at the very time being sent to Asia Minor as St Paul’s delegate, 
St Peter’s commendation would have even greater importance. 


126 I PETER [5 12— 


_ δι᾽ ὀλίγων, cf. Heb. xiii. 22. Even in so long and systematic 
an Epistle as Hebrews the writer feels that the vastness of his 
subject is but slightly represented by his letter. So here St Peter 
may be apologizing for the brevity of his letter and contrasting it 
in thought with the fuller teaching which Silvanus will be able to 
give by word of mouth. 

ἔγραψα is the epistolary aorist, ‘*‘ I am writing.” 

παρακαλῶν καὶ ἐπιμαρτυρῶν. St Peter here sums up his object in 
writing. His purpose is to encourage his readers and to give (or add 
ἐπι...) his testimony to the truth of God’s favour to them. 

ἐπιμαρτυρεῖν occurs nowhere else in Biblical Greek but συνεπιμαρ- 
τυρεῖν is used in Heb. ii. 4 of God attesting the message of the Gospel 
by signs and wonders. 

ταύτην. It is not quite clear what special aspect of God’s favour 
is here intended. The reading of the T.R., εἰς ἣν ἑστήκατε (KLP etc.), 
wherein ye stand, would seem to mean the position which you occupy 
is the true view of God’s free favour. So some critics regard it as a 
testimony to the truth of Pauline Christianity as taught and accepted 
in Asia Minor. 

But in this case St Peter would surely have expressed himself 
more clearly. The best MSS. (SB and many cursives) read εἰς 
ἣν στῆτε, wherein (or to secure which, eis) stand fast. This leaves 
ταύτην undefined and we have consequently to discover what is 
intended from the Epistle itself. In the concluding chapter St Peter 
has urged humility as the condition for receiving God’s favour (χάριν) 
v. 5, and such humility must be exercised not merely towards fellow- 
Christians but towards God by patient endurance of sufferings as a 
prelude to final glory. The God of all favour (χάριτος) called them 
to share His glory by passing through a discipline of sufferings. 
Such sufferings are not inconsistent with God’s favour but rather are 
signs of it, even though they are made use of by Satan to tempt them 
to apostasy. In i. 10 St Peter had spoken of the extension of God’s 
favour to the Gentiles (τῆς εἰς ὑμᾶς χάριτος), as predicted by the 
prophets and watched by angels, and in i. 13 he urged his readers 
to set their hope upon the favour (χάριν) which is being borne to 
them in the revelation of Jesus Christ. Probably therefore St Peter 
means that the object of his letter is (a) to encourage his readers 
in their trial by fire, exhorting them to lead lives consistent with 
their faith and hope, and (b) toassure them that their position as the 
new Israel of God is no accident but the fulfilment of God’s eternal 
purpose of loving favour. Their very sufferings are part of that 
same loving favour. Therefore he urges them to stand fast to secure 
(εἰς) its final consummation in eternal glory. 


5 13] NOTES 127 


13. ἡ ἐν Βαβυλῶνι συνεκλεκτή. She that is elect together with you. 
Some commentators explain this as referring to St Peter’s wife. The 
arguments in favour of this view are 

(a) that we know from 1 Cor. ix. 5 that she accompanied 
St Peter in his missionary work. 

(b) Clement of Alexandria (Strom. vii. 11) tells a story that 
she suffered martyrdom before her husband, and was en- 
couraged by him to ‘‘ remember the -Lord’’ as she was 
led away for execution. Therefore, it is urged, she must 
have been a well-known personage in the early Church. 

(c) that the accompanying salutation from Mark, ‘‘ my son,”’ 
makes it more probable that ἡ συνεκλεκτή also refers to an 
individual, whereas such a metaphorical description of a 
church would be hardly intelligible in a letter, though it 
might be used in Apocalyptic literature. 

In answer to the last objection, it may be urged, that Babylon 
is most probably used in a metaphorical sense and this would suggest 
that ἡ συνεκλεκτή is also metaphorical, especially as other words in 
the Epistle, 6.9. διασπορά in the opening salutation, seem also to be 
metaphorical, 

It is therefore better to explain ἡ συνεκλεκτή as referring to a 
church. This is the interpretation of δὲ, in which ἐκκλησία is added, 
as also in the Vulgate, Peshito and Armenian Versions and in Theo- 
phylact and Oecumenius. 

In support of this view it may be urged that ‘‘ the elect lady ”’ 
κυρία ἐκλεκτή in 2 John and ‘‘ the children of thy elect sister’’ almost 
certainly refer to churches. Clement of Alexandria describes 2 John 
as addressed ‘‘ad quandam Babyloniam Electam nomine, significat 
autem electionem Ecclesiae Sanctae.’’ 

The Rev. J. Chapman 0.8.B. (Journal of Theological Studies, 
July 1904) suggests that 2 John was addressed to the Church in 
Rome, in which case it is a plausible conjecture that Clement 
identified the Κυρία ἐκλεκτή of 2 John with ἡ ἐν Βαβυλῶνι συνεκ- 
λεκτή in 1 Pet. Clement in his Hypotyposes makes no comment 
on these words of St Peter, but in commenting on the next words 
‘*Mark my son’”’ he says that the Romans persuaded Mark to 
commit to writing what Peter preached. Therefore there is little 
doubt that he regarded 1 Peter as being written from Rome. 

In the Book of Henoch ὁ ἐκλεκτός (xl. 5, xlv. 3, 4, etc.) is used 
as a title of the Messiah. It is therefore just possible that 7 
συνεκλεκτή might denote the Bride of ὁ ἐκλεκτός. In Ephesians, 
from which St Peter so frequently borrows, St Paul describes the 
Church as the Bride of Christ (Eph. v. 23—32). In the Apocalypse 


128 I PETER [5 13—14 


the New Jerusalem is described as the Bride, the Lamb’s wife, 
and in the Shepherd of Hermas the Church is represented as a 
woman. 

Βαβυλῶνι. For the three interpretations of this name cf. Introd. 
pp. xxix ff., where arguments were given to shew that Rome is almost 
certainly intended. 

Μάρκος ὁ vids pov. υἱός does not necessarily imply that St Mark 
was a convert of St- Peter, though this is possible, as it was to the 
house of St Mark’s mother that St Peter went on his release from 
prison. The more usual word for a convert would be τέκνον. υἱός 
may merely mean that he has been like a son to St Peter. In 
early tradition Mark is constantly described as the companion of 
St Peter. 

The attitude of St Mark towards Gentile Christians has been dis- 
cussed in the Introduction (p. xlix f.). 

St Mark was certainly in Rome when Colossians was written, 
towards the close of St Paul’s first imprisonment, and may have 
remained there as St Peter’s companion until just before the out- 
break of the Neronian persecution. But he was again in the Hast 
when 2 Tim. was written, as St Paul asks Timothy to bring him 
with him to Rome. This visit in company with St Peter must 
therefore be placed either soon after St Paul’s release or after 
St Paul’s death. 

14. φιλήματι ἀγάπης. ‘A holy kiss’’ is ordered as a Christian 
greeting by St Paul in Rom. xvi. 16; 1 Cor. xvi. 20; 2 Cor. xiii. 12 ; 
1 Thess. v. 26. At first it was used as a personal greeting, but in 
the second century it became part of the Eucharistic service and is 
referred to by Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, the 
Apostolic Constitutions, Cyril of Jerusalem and Chrysostom. After- 
wards it was used as a greeting in the services for Baptism, Marriage 
and Ordination. 

εἰρήνη was the regular Hebrew greeting. Our Lord instructed 
His disciples to use it on arriving at a house, and Himself employed 
it when He appeared to them after the Resurrection. As a farewell 
greeting however the usual form was ‘‘depart in peace,’’ cf. Acts 
xvi. 36. St Paul uses it together with χάρις in the opening salu- 
tations of all his epistles, but his farewell greeting is usually χάρις. 
He does however use εἰρήνη in Eph. vi. 23 and εἰρήνη σοι occurs in 
3 Jn 15. 

ἐν Χριστῷ is a very favourite phrase of St Paul to denote the 
position of Christians as members of Christ, and the same idea has 
already been expressed by St Peter in iii, 16 and v. 10. Such 
language evidently implies a full belief in the divinity of Christ, 


INDEX OF 


Acts, parallels in, xxi f. 

Advent, the second, 25, 33, 102, 
115 

Antioch, 3. Peter in, xiiiff., xvi 

Aorist, gnomic, 41; participles, 
23, 52, 122 

Apostolic Conference, xiii f. 

- Article, use of the, 27, 66 

Ascension, the, 82 f. 

Asia, 13 

Authorship of 1 Pet., xx ff. 


Babylon, xxx f., 127 
Baptism, lxiii, 74, 78 ff. 
Bithynia, xxxv, 13 f. 
Blood of Sprinkling, 15 f. 
Body of Christ, 63 


Canonicity of 1 Pet., xxvii ff. 

Cappadocia, xxxv, 13 

Chase, Bp, xix, xlv f., xlix f., 
Ixxv, 16, 22, 104 

Christian, the name, 108 

Christians, duties of, lxxvii, 52 f.; 
privileges of, lxxvi f.; sufferings 
of, lxxix ff. 

Corinth, xv 


Date of 1 Pet., xxxiii ff. - 
Dative, dynamic, 30 
Deissmann, 24, 62, 66, 109 
Dispersion, the, 1111 f., 10 
Doctrine of 1 Pet., lxxxi f. 


Election, 10 f. 
Emperor, duty to the, xlv, 53, 
57 . 


SUBJECTS 


Empire, attitude towards Chris- 
tianity, xxxviii ff. 

Ephesians, relation of 1 Pet. to, 
lxiv ff. 


Favour, lxxvi, 28, 126 
Flood, the, 74, 78 ff. 


Galatia, 12 

Gentiles, 1 Pet. addressed to, 
lxxi ff. 

Glory, 25f., 104 f., 121 

God; 8. Peter’s conception of, 
lxxxiv f. 


- Hebrews, relation of 1 Pet. to, 


lxviii f. 

Hell, descent into, 83 ff., 94 f. 

Henoch, Book of, 31, 74, 88, 
109 n., 127 

Hort, Dr, xlv, lxv, 16, 22, 29, 39, 
45, 49, 79, 112 

Husbands, exhortation to, lxxviii, 
68 


Imperatives, aorist and present,58 
Imperfect, graphic, 62 
Inheritance, 20 


James, relation of 1 Pet. to, 111] f. 
Jesus Christ, 8, Peter’s concep- 
tion of, lxxxvf.; allusions to 
life and work of, xxiv f.; allu- 
sions to sayings of, xxv f. 
Judgment, 93 f., 109 


Lamb, Christ as the, 37 


130 


Lord’s Prayer, traces of the, 35, 
104 


Mark, xxi, xxxiii, xlix f., 128 
Marriage, 66 

Messiah, 29 

Messianic Age, 22 

Middle Voice, 23, 27, 43 


Name, The, xliii, 103, 108 
Nero, xl f., xlvi ff. 


Optative with εἰ, 72, 76 


Parry, liv f., lvi, lviii f., 117 

Participles, aorist, 23, 52, 122; 
imperatival, 59 f.; perfect, 20, 
52, 92 

Paul, S., connexion with 5. Peter, 
xiii ff., xix, 1f.; silence of 1 Pet. 
about, lii ἢ, 

Persecution, xxxvi ff. 

Peter, 8., at Antioch, xivf.; his 
calls, ix f.; his character, x ff.; 
knowledge of Greek, xxiii f.; 
martyrdom, date of, xlvi f.; the 
Rock, xi; visit to Rome, xviff., 
lf. 

Pliny, xxxix f., 108 

Pontus, xvi, xxxv, 11 f. 

Predestination, 14 f., 49 


INDEX OF SUBJECTS 


Presbyters, lxxix, 111 f. 
Prophets, 27 f. 


Ramsay, Prof., xxxiv, xliif., xlvi, 
10, 73, 107, 119 

Readers, nationality of the, lxix f. 

Rome, xvi f., xxxi, xlvi ff. 

aay relation of 1 Pet. to, 
x ff. 


Salvation, 21 

Sanday and Headlam, lxviii, 20, 
25, 49 

Shekinah, 105 

Silvanus, xxxv, li, Ιχχν, 123 

Slaves, exhortation to, Ixxviii, 
53, 59 

Spirit of Christ, 28 f., 77 

Spirit, the Holy, 15, 32 

Spirits in prison, 74, 77f., 88, 
94 ἢ 

Stone, Christ as the, Ixi, 47 f. 

Suffering, lxxx, 25 ff., 71, 73 f., 
101, 106 


Tacitus, xl f. 
Trinity, the Holy, 14 


Versions, lxxxvii 


Wives, exhortation to, lxxviii, 65 ff. 


INDEX TO NOTES ON GREEK WORDS 


ἀγαλλιᾶν i. 6, 8, iv. 13, p. 23 

ἅγιος 1. 12, 15, 16, ii. 5, 9, 111. 5, 
pp. 15 ἢ. 

ἁγνίζειν i. 22, p. 39 

ἀγνωσία ii. 15, p. 58 

ἄδολος 11. 2, p. 45 

αἷμα i. 2,19, pp. 15f. 

aloxpoxepd@s v. 2, p. 114 

ἀκρογωνιαῖος ii. 6, p. 48 

ἀλλοτριοεπίσκοπος iv. 15, p. 107 

ἀμαράντινος Υ. 4, p. 115 

ἄμωμος i. 19, p. 38 

ἀναγεννᾶν i. 3, 23, p. 19 

ἀναφέρειν ii. 5, 24, pp. 46, 62 

ἀνάχυσις iv, 4, p. 93 

ἀντίδικος v. 8, p. 119 

ἀντίτυπον iii. 21, p. 79 

ἀπογίνεσθαι ii. 24, Ὁ. 64 

ἀπόθεσις iii. 21, p. 80 

ἀποκάλυψις 1. 7, 13, iv. 13, pp. 25, 
33 


ἀπολογία ili. 15, pp. xlii, 73 
ἀπροσωπολήπτως 1. 17, pp. 35 ἢ. 
ἀρετή ii. 9, p. 51 

ἀρχιποίμην v. 4, p. 115 

ἀσωτία iv. 4, p. 93 


βασίλειον 11. 9, p. 50 
βούλημα iv. 3, p. 91 


γάλα ii. 2, p. 43 
γραφή ii. 6, p. 47 


διά ii, 14, ili. 20, v. 12, pp. 57, 78, 
123 


διάβολος v. 8, p. 119 

διακονεῖν i. 12, iv. 10, 11, p. 99 
διασπορά 1. 1, pp. liiif., 10 
διδόναι χάριν v. 5, p. 117 
δίκαιος ili, 18, p. 76 


δοκίμιον i. 7, pp. lv, 23f. 
δόξα i. 7, etc., pp. 25f., 104f. 


ἐγκομβοῦσθαι v. 5, p. 116 

ἐγκόπτειν iii. 7, p. 68 

ἔθνος ii. 9, p. 50 

εἰ καί iii. 14, pp. 71f. 

εἰ with optative iii. 14, 17, p. 72 

εἰδέναι with ace, and inf. v. 9, 
p. 121 

εἰδωλολατρία iv. 3, p. 92 

els i. 2, 3, 10, 11, 21, 25, v. 12, 
pp. lxxii, 6, 16, 18, 28, 39, 41,. 
126 

els τοῦτο ii. 21, iii. 9, iv. 6, pp. 61, 
70, 94 

éx ii. 12, p. 55 

ἐκλεκτός i, 1, etc., p. 10 

ἐκτενής -@s i, 22, iv. 8, p. 40 

ἔλεος 1. 3, p. 19 

ἔννοια iv. 1, p. 90 

ἔπαινος i, 7, p. 24 

ἐπερώτημα 111. 21, p. 81 

ἐπηρεάζειν ili, 16, p. 73 

ἐπιεικής ii. 18, p. 60 

ἐπικαλεῖσθαι 1. 17, p. 35 

ἐπιμαρτυρεῖν V. 12, p. 126 

ἐπισκοπή ii. 12, p. 56 

ἐπίσκοπος li, 25, p. 64 

ἐπιτελεῖσθαι V. 9, p. 121 — 

ἐποπτεύειν ii. 12, ili. 2, pp. 55f., 
67 

(ἑρμηνεύτης p. Xxiii) 

ἔσχατος i. 5, 20, pp. 22, 38 

ἕτοιμος i. 5, p. 22° 


ζηλωτής 111. 17, p. 71 
ζωοποιεῖν 111. 18, p. 77 


ἡσύχιος 111. 4, p. 67 


INDEX TO NOTES 


132 
θέλημα iv. 2, p. 91 


ἴδιος ili. 1, p. 66 
ἱεράτευμα ii. 5, p. 46 


κακία ii. 1, p. 43 
κακοποιός ii. 12, iv. 15, pp. xliii, 


κακοῦν iii. 18, p. 71 
κατά iv. 6, pp. 95 f. 
κατακυριεύειν V. 3, p. 114 
καταρτίζειν v.10, p. 122 
κλέος ii, 20, p. 61 
κληρονομία i. 4, p. 20 
κλῆρος Υ. 3, p. 114 
κτίσις il. 18, p, 57 


λαλεῖν iv. 11, p. 99 

λαός ii. 9, pp. 50 ἢ. 

λίθος ii. 4, pp. 47 f. 

λογικός ii. 2, p. 44 

“λόγιον iv. 11, p. 100 

λόγος i. 28, iii. 1, pp. 40f., 66 
λυτροῦσθαι i. 18, pp. 36f. 


μάρτυς Vv. 1, p. 113 
μάταιος i. 18, p. 37 
μώλωψ, ii, 24, p. 64 


νεώτερος Vv. 5, pp. 115f. 


ξενίξεσθαι iv, 4, pp. 92 f. 
ξύλον ii, 24, p. 63 


οἰκονόμος iv. 10, p. 99 
οἶκος iv. 17, pp. 109 f. 
ὄνομα iv. 14, 15, pp. 103, 108 ἢ. 


παρακύπτειν i, 12, p. 31 
παρεπίδημος i. 1, ᾿ 11, pp. 11, 54 
παροικία i. 17, p 

πάροικος ii. Ἐν p- rf 
πατροπαράδοτος i. 18, p. 37 


ON GREEK WORDS 


περιποίησις ii. 9, p. 51 

πιστὸς εἰς i, 20, p. 39 

πνεῦμα 1. 2, iii, 18, 19, pp. 15, 77 
πνεῦμα Χριστοῦ i. 11, pp. 28 f. 
πρεσβύτερος Vv. 1, pp. 111 f. 
πρόγνωσις i. 2, pp. 14 f. 
προμαρτύρεσθαι i, 11, p. 29 
προσάγειν iii, 18, pp. 76f. 
προσέρχεσθαι ii. 4, p. 45 
προφήτης i. 10, pp. 27 f. 
πύρωσις iv. 12, pp. xli, 102 


ῥαντισμός i, 2, pp. 15 ff. 


σκεῦος iii. 7, p. 68 

στερεός v. 9, p. 120 
στέφανος v. 4, p. 115 
στηρίζειν v. 10, p. 122 
συμπρεσβύτερος Vv. 1, p. 112 
συνείδησις ii. 19, p. 61 
συνεκλεκτός V. 12, p. 127 
συνσχηματίζειν 1. 14, p. 34 
σῶμα ii. 24, p. 68 
σωτηρία i. 5, p. 21 
σωφρονεῖν iv. 7, p. 96 


ταπεινοφροσύνη V. 5, p. 116 
τηρεῖν 1. 4, p. 20 


ὑπερήφανος Vv. 5, p. 117 
ὑπογραμμός li, 21, p. 61 


φιλαδελφία i, 22, p. 40 
φίλημα v. 14, p. 128 
φιλόξενος iv. 9, p. 98 
φόβος iii. 2, 14, pp. 67, 72 
φυλακή iil. 19, pp. 78, 88. 


χάρι: i. 10, ii. 19, v. 6, 10, 12, 
pp. 28, 60, 117, 121, 126 

χορηγεῖν iv. 11, p. 100 

Χριστιανός iv. 16, p. 108 

Χριστός i. 11, p. 29 





CAMBRIDGE : PRINTED BY JOHN CLAY, M.A. AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 





RETURN TO the circulation desk of any 
University of California Library 


or to the 


NORTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 
Bldg. 400, Richmond Field Station 

University of California 

Richmond, CA 94804-4698 


ALL BOOKS MAY BE RECALLED AFTER 7 DAYS 


* 2-month loans may be renewed by calling 
(510) 642-6753 


* 1-year loans may be recharged by bringing 
books to NRLF 


“ Renewals and recharges may be made 
4 days prior to due date 


DUE AS STAMPED BELOW 
FEB 0 8 2005 A 


ol 9 Raat pe ξα....ς. ὁ ὁ ὁ ὁ ὁὁὁὦὦὁὦὁὦὁ ... i 
| 4 
og SS Re os ae Ὸῤ ΘΠ Ὶ | ' Ν 


ΟΠ μὴ 


ne 





tf 


if sty ἢ 
ἀν nh 
ἵ a ᾿ i 

44 vi ᾿ 


ἶ ἣν ; 
1} 
te 


it 
ἡ 
ἢ ΠΗ 





